The first season or two with George Reeves is cool. Superman doesn't come off as naive and Clark isn't a goof. Clark might be somewhat cowardly, but he's not a naive klutz. Phyllis Coates as Lois Lane (first season) is awesome.
Last edited:
And Star Trek V failed because...
- Thread starter Zaku
- Start date
Interesting. Thank you the insight.
...and that was not going to sell the series, or--if by a miracle, the series launched with Hunter--draw the audience in. To be sure, Hunter's dry Pike was not going to allow Nimoy a strong, naturalistic contrast, which helped him push Spock into a far different direction than the barking, excitable alien from "The Cage."
Strong point: Shatnet not only believed in the material, but wanted the audience to feel as if Kirk 7 his world were real enough for you to care. Few sci-fi productions ever pull that off, as the performances are never strong enough for the audience to be fully invested in the fantasy. Certain members can play "what if" as much as they like (fighting an uphill battle against existing history), but to this day, if the average person thinks of "Star Trek," you can argue (forcefully) that Shatner's Kirk comes to mind, not anyone from TNG-ENT, or the J.J. films.
The takeaway: you continue to contribute nothing, as evidenced by your struggles in post #167
Last edited:
One aspect of STAR TREK V that interests me a lot is the fact that it would've likely done even more poorly, had STAR TREK IV not been so successful. The Final Frontier would've likely "killed" the franchise. Hell, PARAMOUNT might've even Green-Lighted the script thinking that an Intergalactictic Televangelist was bound to be funny, like The Voyage Home had been. I wonder what STAR TREK's 25th Anniversary would've meant, had STAR TREK V failed even more spectacularly than it did. Would PARAMOUNT have just re-released Wrath of Khan and The Voyage Home, for that occassion? It's my understanding that STAR TREK V's failure did nothing to discourage William Shatner from threatening the fans with the possibility of him directing another of the movies. Imagine that! What would The Shat's follow-up have been to this valentine to James T. Kirk?
No actor owns a role forever. Basil Rathbone was Sherlock Holmes for a generation of movie-goers, while later TV viewers swore that nobody would ever eclipse Jeremy Brett. But if you were to poll modern audiences on who the definitive "Holmes" is, Benedict Cumberbatch would probably win by a landslide. That's just the way it goes. Times change. Audiences change. Tastes change.
Ditto for Bond, Dracula, Superman, etc. Sure, they originated in print, but I don't think that's really a crucial distinction, especially since more people watch the movies than read the books these days. Let's be honest here; ninety percent of audience for, say, CASINO ROYALE have never read the book and think of Bond primarily as a movie character. Again, that's just the world we live in.
If Star Trek endures into the future, there will be many Captain Kirks, and the Trekkies of 2187 will be arguing about which of the six Captain Kirks is the best!
Ditto for Bond, Dracula, Superman, etc. Sure, they originated in print, but I don't think that's really a crucial distinction, especially since more people watch the movies than read the books these days. Let's be honest here; ninety percent of audience for, say, CASINO ROYALE have never read the book and think of Bond primarily as a movie character. Again, that's just the world we live in.
If Star Trek endures into the future, there will be many Captain Kirks, and the Trekkies of 2187 will be arguing about which of the six Captain Kirks is the best!
The sad part is, some movie goers probably have never seen anyone else play Sherlock except Cumberbatch, so they have no previous performers to actually compare him with. Even on this board, I've seen people say they refuse to watch black and white films or television shows. Some won't watch anything made before they were born.
Sadly I've known such people off-line as well. Shockingly narrow minded.
What's weird is when I meet older people who won't watch black-and-white anymore. "But . . but . . . you grew up in the forties."
Hmm. Wonder what's on MeTV right now . ...
Now that's something I've not encountered. And by "older" I mean over 40. At that age they should have had sufficient exposure to films and television from before their time.
I know! It's weird.
Me, I'm old enough to remember when "In Living Color" was a big deal and old black-and-white shows were still routinely shown on TV. Nowadays, only TCM and MeTV seem willing to run black-and-white stuff anymore . . ..
Well we have three Holmeses right now. Downey on film ( A third one is being planned) and Miller and Cumberbatch on TV.
I thought Kirk Alyn only made one Superman serial, with George Reeves doing the other, which got re-edited into the feature "Superman VS The Mole Men".
Interesting thing about "Superman VS The Mole Men". One of the Mole Men was played by an actor that, in makeup, bore a striking resemblance to Max Grodenchik. Of course, Max was nowhere near having been born yet at the time, so it's actually quite odd.
I'll have to check my Superman box set. I only remember the one. Did Atom Man vs Superman ever get released on home video?
Yes, originally I had the serials Superman and Atom Man vs. Superman in separate 2-cassette vhs sets back in the 80s or early 90s. In 2006, Warners put both together in a dvd package, and that's what I currently use. Noel Neill plays Lois, and Our Gang's Butch, Tommy Bond, is Jimmy Olsen.
In Superman and the Mole Men (aka as the 2-parter "The Unknown People" for the series), the Mole Men are played by Johnny Roventini, John Bambury, Billy Curtis, and Jerry Maren. Maren is in The Wizard of Oz, as the Munchkin who gives Dorothy the lollipop. He's also the little man throwing confetti at the end of episodes of The Gong Show. Curtis also worked a lot (also in Oz), and reappears in the color Adventures of Superman episodes as the Martian Mr. Zero.
Star Trek connection: Superman and the Mole Men also has Jeff Corey ("The Cloud Minders") as the bad guy, and Beverly Washburn ("The Deadly Years") as a little girl visited by the Mole Men. Billy Curtis is one of the little gold skinned guys in "Journey to Babel".
I recommend Gary Grossman's book Superman: From Serial to Cereal.
In Superman and the Mole Men (aka as the 2-parter "The Unknown People" for the series), the Mole Men are played by Johnny Roventini, John Bambury, Billy Curtis, and Jerry Maren. Maren is in The Wizard of Oz, as the Munchkin who gives Dorothy the lollipop. He's also the little man throwing confetti at the end of episodes of The Gong Show. Curtis also worked a lot (also in Oz), and reappears in the color Adventures of Superman episodes as the Martian Mr. Zero.
Star Trek connection: Superman and the Mole Men also has Jeff Corey ("The Cloud Minders") as the bad guy, and Beverly Washburn ("The Deadly Years") as a little girl visited by the Mole Men. Billy Curtis is one of the little gold skinned guys in "Journey to Babel".
I recommend Gary Grossman's book Superman: From Serial to Cereal.
Last edited:
I was born in 1959, the year George Reeves died (although I didn't learn that until my teens more than a decade plus later). So in the '60s I grew up watching George Reeves in The Adventures Of Superman reruns as well as the animated Superman on Saturday mornings. I also didn't know about Kirk Alyn until reading about him in Starlog magazine in articles covering the then forthcoming 1978 Superman.
So I didn't experience Reeves' death as a kid like many others who had at the time. Nonetheless Reeves made a huge mark on me as Superman. Watching it now as an adult I still love his portayal even when the sensibilities of the show began to slide after the first season (which is in b&w). In 1978 there were parts of Christopher Reeves' Superman I liked, but I didn't think he compared to his predecessor. And over the years I find the 1978 film hasn't aged well as the camp has become evermore apparent.
A lot of people bash Man Of Steel, but I appreciated the absence of overt camp which I find painful in the Chris Reeve films. I also liked Henry Cavill's portrayal. One of my favourite Supermans is the animated series of the '90s. It's updated and yet captures a resonance of the George Reeves' series during its first season.
So I didn't experience Reeves' death as a kid like many others who had at the time. Nonetheless Reeves made a huge mark on me as Superman. Watching it now as an adult I still love his portayal even when the sensibilities of the show began to slide after the first season (which is in b&w). In 1978 there were parts of Christopher Reeves' Superman I liked, but I didn't think he compared to his predecessor. And over the years I find the 1978 film hasn't aged well as the camp has become evermore apparent.
A lot of people bash Man Of Steel, but I appreciated the absence of overt camp which I find painful in the Chris Reeve films. I also liked Henry Cavill's portrayal. One of my favourite Supermans is the animated series of the '90s. It's updated and yet captures a resonance of the George Reeves' series during its first season.
Yeah, but some over 40 were reared to see any B&W production as "old," even in the case of some 1960s TV series that made the transition to color just one season later. Color is too often packaged as something relevant--alive, while B&W is booted to corner as "ancient" or archival--but not to be fully appreciated.
Their loss.
Agreed.
(Says the guy who was watching an old "Perry Mason" episode last night--in glorious black-and-white.)
Similar threads
- Locked
