• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

The plusses of TAS...

Warped9

Admiral
Admiral
TAS is something of the orphan of the franchise. And I’m a bit guilty of it myself. A lot of it’s appeal (for me) is a matter of nostalgia because it was the only new Star Trek we had (outside of books) in the visual medium until TMP.

I can totally understand the frustration of some with the limited animation. One can argue all they want about how good it was at the time (for television), but the fact remains that it can be a hard sell for many of today’s viewers. And while the animation was pretty good for television it was far from state-of-the-art of what was possible even back then. But just as TOS could never afford state-of-the-art feature film f/x TAS couldn’t afford state-of-the-art feature film animation of the day. It wasn’t going to happen.

There is also the matter of inconsistent voice acting. Some of the main cast weren't really accustomed to this type of acting and as a result their dialogue really can seem as if they're just reading off a page. And the voices for guest characters could also be disappointing with the limited use of the regular cast filling in as a cost saving measure.

The episodes themselves can also feel truncated as if scenes are missing. This is an almost inevitable result of the kind of stories TAS was trying to cram into a half-hour format. Many of these stories could have made fine live-action TOS episodes, but they simply didn’t have enough time to flesh them out properly.


But for all the criticisms one can fairly, and unfairly, make of TAS I must say I think there were still big plusses to it.

- Animation allowed them to visualize so many things that would have been practically impossible for TOS. New ship designs, exotic alien life forms and planetscapes were beyond TOS’ live-action resources, but merely a drawing and painting away for TAS.

- We were given additional worldbuilding to the Star Trek universe as well as added background detail to main characters. In particular there is the background to Spock’s childhood as well as that of McCoy as a young medic.

- For a Saturday morning program we were getting largely adult level stories that would have fit seasmlessy along with the TOS episodes.

I have often said that I look at TAS as a stylized storyboard of live-action events allowing me to accept that what we’re seeing is somewhat representative of what happened in the TOS universe. The detail can be debated, but the overall essence is valid.


For myself I loved many of the exotic non-humanoid life forms. The Skorr, the Vendorian and the Phylosians are my favourites. I really like the alien ship design from “Beyond The Farthest Star.” And the different looking shuttlecraft, particularly the scoutship from “Slaver Weapon,” as well as the freighter Huron (re: "Pirates Of Orion") and the robot freighters (re: "More Tribbles, More Troubles") really nailed that there was a diversity of design within Starfleet.


It was far from perfect, but a lot of cool stuff came out of it nonetheless.
 
And while the animation was pretty good for television it was far from state-of-the-art of what was possible even back then. But just as TOS could never afford state-of-the-art feature film f/x TAS couldn’t afford state-of-the-art feature film animation of the day. It wasn’t going to happen.

I should point out, though, that TOS's effects were state-of-the-art and then some for '60s television. Maybe they weren't quite up to 2001-level effects, but they were beyond anything that had ever been achieved on the small screen to that point.

By the same token, TV animation in the '70s was far, far simpler than feature animation, but Filmation's work was toward the upper end of the limited-animation spectrum. I just finished watching the 1975 Return to the Planet of the Apes animated series from Doug Wildey for Depatie-Freleng (available on Hulu), and while the still artwork and design are often quite striking, the animation is far cruder than anything Filmation did. A lot of people have mistaken RttPotA for a Filmation show, probably because of the limited animation and because its title narrator sounded not unlike Filmation producer/narrator Lou Scheimer (I think it was actually Henry Corden, though). But it was substantially cruder in execution (though the writing was interesting).


But for all the criticisms one can fairly, and unfairly, make of TAS I must say I think there were still big plusses to it.

- Animation allowed them to visualize so many things that would have been practically impossible for TOS. New ship designs, exotic alien life forms and planetscapes were beyond TOS’ live-action resources, but merely a drawing and painting away for TAS.

Absolutely. The design work was fantastic. It really felt like a universe populated by aliens rather than just a bunch of humans in funny clothes. The vistas were grander and more exotic. And TAS introduced several new classes of Starfleet vessels and shuttlecraft.


- We were given additional worldbuilding to the Star Trek universe as well as added background detail to main characters. In particular there is the background to Spock’s childhood as well as that of McCoy as a young medic.

And a better ensemble feel, with Sulu and Uhura feeling more like equal participants. (Particularly in "The Slaver Weapon," where they and Spock were the focus of the whole episode, and "The Lorelei Signal," where Uhura got to command the ship.)


- For a Saturday morning program we were getting largely adult level stories that would have fit seasmlessy along with the TOS episodes.

Yep. It was consciously designed and promoted as the first Saturday morning cartoon aimed at adult viewers.
 
I can only speak for myself, but I love TAS. It's my "fourth season" for Star Trek.

All of those limitations really don't bother me. Would I liked those limitations to be removed, sure. But I rather have a limited production tell me a story I like than no production at all.

I've enjoyed many shows that really didn't have great features but told stories I liked. Land of the Lost, Robotech, Voltron, Ultraman, they all have some of the same problems, too. But I find those budget saving features a plus, I admire their ability to save money and tell a good story.

I've also seen the opposite, productions that spent millions on crap. I'm not listing examples of those, I don't want to stir that pot but many know how feel about certain things.
 
Apparently TAS aired at 10:30 Eastern in the 1973-4 season and 11:30 Eastern in the '74-5 season. But there were plenty of kids' shows in those time slots as well; in its second season it was on opposite the second half of Super Friends, for instance.
 
It was consciously designed and promoted as the first Saturday morning cartoon aimed at adult viewers.
That makes sense with the time slot; I seem to remember it as being on at 11:00 AM (Eastern/Pacific). Not the kiddie cereal-crunching hour.

10:30 a.m. ET/PT for its first season on NBC starting in September of 1973; 11:30 a.m. ET/PT for its second season on NBC starting in September of 1974.

So, on average, 11:00 is correct. ;)

(Christopher beat me by a couple of minutes. Sorry to have belabored the point.)
 
For me, it's about how faithful to the Original Series it all was. In an era when many live-action-to-animation-adaptations were (shall we say) often very loose in how closely they chose to stick to the core material, whether it be with making things overtly more cartoony or adding comedic side-kicks or whatever, TAS deserves plaudits for basically taking the concept of TOS and just doing it in animation. We take this for granted today in a world where television animation has now gained a lot more credibility in it's own right, but back when TAS was made, it stood out precisely because it didn't pander to the new medium. It basically just told classic style Star Trek stories that happened to be made in animation rather than live-action.

I've always given it props for that. :techman:
 
For me, it's about how faithful to the Original Series it all was. In an era when many live-action-to-animation-adaptations were (shall we say) often very loose in how closely they chose to stick to the core material, whether it be with making things overtly more cartoony or adding comedic side-kicks or whatever, TAS deserves plaudits for basically taking the concept of TOS and just doing it in animation. We take this for granted today in a world where television animation has now gained a lot more credibility in it's own right, but back when TAS was made, it stood out precisely because it didn't pander to the new medium. It basically just told classic style Star Trek stories that happened to be made in animation rather than live-action.

I've always given it props for that. :techman:
Yes, we don't appreciate what a trailblazer it was in that respect. Good point.

And yeah, I guess 11:00 was a sort of average. :lol: Not that other kids' shows weren't still on at that hour (Fat Albert, to name another by Filmation), but adults who slept in on Saturdays were generally up and about by 10:30.
 
When so many series of that era presented "resident mascots", usually animals on the verge of human intelligence, we sahould count ourselves lucky the network (or whomever) did not mandate such for Trek. If it had, I don't think anyone here except the most obssessive "completist" would be arguing for its "inclusion". Even the much praised "Flash Gordon" did not elude that "curse". Its second season presented us with a comical dragon hatchling...pink, no less! (Hal Sutherland's infamous color blindness strikes again!)

Merciful Mogg, dare we speculate what kind off critter might have been saddled with the Enterprise crew?!

* SHUDDER *

Sincerely,

Bill
 
I recall a rumor of someone reanimating them using CGI, and the same stories,voice and music.

I wonder if the original crew revisit an animated movie or a series?
 
When so many series of that era presented "resident mascots", usually animals on the verge of human intelligence, we sahould count ourselves lucky the network (or whomever) did not mandate such for Trek. If it had, I don't think anyone here except the most obssessive "completist" would be arguing for its "inclusion". Even the much praised "Flash Gordon" did not elude that "curse". Its second season presented us with a comical dragon hatchling...pink, no less! (Hal Sutherland's infamous color blindness strikes again!)

Merciful Mogg, dare we speculate what kind off critter might have been saddled with the Enterprise crew?!

* SHUDDER *

Sincerely,

Bill

Could we count Lt M'Ress as the animal mascot with Human intelligence?
What's more fun than having a sexy kitty cat woman on the bridge all the time. And she purrs alot too.
 
We praise it for not pandering to the genre in the usual ways, but ironically the best episode featured a child protagonist and animal mascot.
 
And yet for all of these plusses many of us find the show largely a bore. Sure, you can applaud the effort made on all sides, but for all the nice art and "adult" stories the pacing is glacial and the performances mostly lifeless. What Hanna-Barbera figured out early on when they effectively invented the limited animation process back for things like The Ruff and Ready Show and Huckleberry Hound was that if you can't make the animation good you get GREAT voice acting to carry the load. The TOS actors flopped at this, most likely because they weren't well-directed or directed at all. That was a big flaw and it really kills the show.
 
^Perhaps, but those flaws were far from atypical for the era. I mentioned Return to the Planet of the Apes above. Its voice acting was just as flat as TAS's acting. Characters would deliver all their lines in the same conversational tone even when they were supposed to be desperately afraid or in the middle of a raging storm. Oddly, though, none of its cast seemed to be experienced voice actors except for Henry Corden, who played the main villain (General Urko, based on Mark Lenard's character from the live-action TV series), and who would later become the second voice of Fred Flintstone.

Granted, "It was above average for its time" isn't necessarily going to satisfy people today, given how much TV animation has improved since then. But it is worth noting that none of its flaws were unique to it or to Filmation, and it was on the upper end of the quality curve for the period.
 
As I said, I'm not denying it was a big effort, and maybe even par for the course, but that doesn't make it really good.
 
I always compare it to Filmation's own The New Adventures of Batman, which *could* have been so much more than it was, what with having Adam West and Burt Ward back as the voices of the dynamic duo, but which got hampered by the usual 'kiddiefication' in the form of one dimensional plots and the focus on cute comedy side-kick Bat-Mite.

Star Trek: The Animated Series had it's heart in the right place, in-so-much as it treated the pre-existing Star Trek universe with absolute respect, and tried it's hardest to exist within the realms of it. Rather than simply being "a cartoon based on Star Trek", TAS actually *was* Star Trek to it's foundations.

These days, especially with the likes of Batman: The Animated Series and Star Wars: The Clone Wars, we've come to take for granted cartoon spin-offs that are faithful to the properties they are based on. But back in the seventies, Star Trek: TAS was almost unique in this regard.
 
It's similarly impressive that the Power Records (at least the ones scripted by Alan Dean Foster) had intelligent stories told in a true Star Trek way without dumbing down the dialogue for kids. Someone was ensuring quality in spinoff media.

[As I've mentioned here before, as a kid I picked up at least six new words from one Power Records story alone (envoy, hegemony, palatable, protocol, subaltern, subterfuge).]
 
We praise it for not pandering to the genre in the usual ways, but ironically the best episode featured a child protagonist and animal mascot.

But I'll politely counter that the Sehlat I-Chaya was depicted pretty much like a (relatively speaking) "realistic" dog as opposed to to a Scooby-Doo type sidekick with slurred but still understandable language skills. And except for that brief moment with him looking "almost" comically fatigued after following young Spock into the desert, his presence was certainly not played for laughs. He was more "Old Yeller" (at least in intent if not execution...ooh, sorry, poor choice of word).

Sincerely,

Bill
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top