Exactly. The Kolinahr is not elimination or purging of emotion (the explanation of which may have been simplified for human consumption), but control. Stoicism is a mask, and logic is a diversion.
It would help if the scripts would give Spock more to do, as he's become exactly what Nimoy wanted to avoid in the later episodes: used primarily for his tricks and catchphrases rather than as a fully formed character. I'm not asking fan actors to do more than they can. Nobody is Leonard Nimoy and I don't expect any non-pro to come close. However, I'm not seeing it in the scripts themselves. Here Spock is just the stoic science officer; there is no friendship and no further depth. I'd love to see a change on the ground level that remind us why Kirk is inconsolable whenever Spock is close to death, or presumed dead or really frigging dead. As it stands now, the "big 3" is the "medium 2."
I just watched this episode and as well as "Fairest of them All." Now, honestly, I think this is the ONLY fan production that hasn't been a complete joke IMHO. I'm not even a big TOS fan, but this was absolutely mesmerizing. The casting, acting, story and production values were all top notch. "Fairest of them all" just took it to another level. Jeepers, I hope we get more! I'm a believer!
Well then here's some good news for you: there's an episode that was released between those two - "Lolani." Highly recommend checking it out.
Well, if the fan film writers could find a way to reroute their future scripts through an external editing person, they might be able to alter the outcome of the reaction from fans when the fan film is released by negating the effects extraneous technobabble before the negative reaction occurs.
Not about STC specifically, but fanfilms in general: doing a check for excess jargon is a good idea. I'm writing a script set in the tech industry and even though it's all real stuff and not technobabble, I've asked non-techy people to read the thing, and I pay particular attention if they grouse about the amount of lingo therein. You want the flavor of the world the characters inhabit but not to leave a bad taste in anyone's mouth.
I'm particularly reminded of the bit of technobabble spouted by Sulu in "Pilgrim Of Eternity" regarding something about a phaser's resonant frequency or something. As soon as the words came out if Grant Imahara's mouth I thought WTF?--that's definitely not TOS.
I usually don't watch fan-made productions because while the sets and SFX are amazing compared with TOS usually the acting is abysmal. However I decided to watch STC - all 3 eps in a row and pretty much was amazed and impressed. However, I noticed the Spock thing and when Kirk was being attacked by Apollo I was expecting Spock to come in and save the day and when it was McKenna I thought well Spock must be on the bridge or something but no he was standing behind her looking 'amazed'. No way, not even in TOS Season One would Spock let anyone do that to the captain. Even in Lolani when Kirk was stressing back and forth about what to do usually Spock would go to Kirk and offer support. I kept wondering where Spock was. Or McCoy. I'm not against a strong female character like McKenna (with a big wig) but I think there's room for the big 3 bromance. I miss it. That being said I really enjoyed all 3 episodes. I agree they just need to get Spock right.
STC captures the spirit and "look" of TOS better than any other fan production to date, including Phase II. Especially the cinematography. I too wonder about McKenna, but am willing to keep an open mind about her. The issues with Spock definitely need to be addressed, but more than any other TOS fan production, I have highest hopes for this one. Congratulations on the geekie thingy award.
This may be a small matter, but (and this is a compliment in itself) the thing I find most distracting in STC is what you might call the lack of good diction or elocution in the performances. It's something of which the actors are probably unconscious, but it sticks out as a difference from the way actors used to be trained in the Sixties. This is especially noticeable with female characters, such as McKennah, Lolani, and to some degree Uhura. Just listen to the way classic Star Trek actresses delivered their lines and you'll hear class, elegance, and sophistication in their pronunciation. But where someone like Carolyn Palamas or Helen Noel would say clearly "What are you going to do?"... McKennah or Lolani would say sloppily "Whaddya gonna do?" McKennah even pronounces her first name as "Uh-leese" rather than "Eh-leese." It's subtle but irritating. Ah, yes, one of my Earth emotions. Another minor niggle-- It's "You have the conn," never "You've got the conn."
^^ A very good point. I've observed the same thing at times. I agree they are likely unconscious of it. Another thing I've noticed occasionally is the use of a more contemporary style of language. Certainly the occasional use of TNG style technobbable, even when moderate, sticks out like a sore thumb. Larry Nemecek ad McCoy said something in "Lolan" referring to the girl having been in a "scrap" that really seemed out of place to me. They're small things, but they are distinct.
Capturing how people spoke in other times is tricky. Mad Men tries and does it pretty well at it, but even they mess up. For instance, a character used the term "leverage" in the modern business sense in an era where that was pretty much specific to one industry... and not theirs. Subtle things like "I need to" vs. "I ought to", for instance.
^^ I agree. It would be a challenging thing to defend against. I can appreciate a measure of awareness on the writing staff's part, but I wouldn't get my shorts in a knot over it considering how much else they get right.
That's not really the same thing. Early on the characters were somewhat in flux and very little had been cemented yet. Even then the diction and elocution of actors on '60's era television was distinctly different than today. I would roughly call it having "lazy mouths." I find today's actors mumble a lot and often don't pronounce words very clearly. It's often very apparent.