I think this is probably true but then again there was that incident with the Kobayashi Maru.
Do you miss the original crew?
- Thread starter Ghost
- Start date
I think this is probably true but then again there was that incident with the Kobayashi Maru.
I thought just the opposite. If the homework was just movie series Kirk, maybe. TV series Kirk? I don't see it. I thought Pine missed Shatner's quiet confidence, the dry but good-natured side of his humor, and the way could get a little exasperated without blowing his top. Shatner's acting style has been caricatured so much that a lot of times we forget how well he could be understated.
Kirk's "contempt" for authority is also pretty minor in the series. He had disagreements, but recognizes authority and follows orders. The only time I can think of when he openly disrespected a superior was when he blew up at Matt Decker in the heat of the moment.
But, even though the 2009 version actors didn't do it for me, the depth they could bring to their characters in a couple hundred screen-minutes versus three or four thousand doesn't really seem like a fair comparison.
Kirk is not arrogant. Oh, sure, sometimes he's been blind sided, but there are many examples of him revealing just how unsure he is of himself, and that his so called arrogance is a projection of confidence for his crew. As Spock said, if he's anything less than perfect the crew can start to lose faith. That's a lot of pressure.
There are two instances where we see distinct glimpses of this in TOS. Balance of Terror and Naked Time. We also see him grappling with choices on many occasions. This is not the actions of an arrogant man. An arrogant man doesn't need to grapple with anything. They know what's best and they do it. Without a seconds thought. We see truly arrogant people in TOS on many occasions.
We also see that Kirk understands his own fallibility. In TMP when he specifically asks Decker to make sure Kirk doesn't mess up too badly, that's Kirk doing what he often did with McCoy and Spock in TOS. He's saying "Hey, i'm in over my head here, and I just want to make sure i'm on the right track." See "Ultimate Computer" where he confides in McCoy. Again. Asking if he's feeling something for the wrong reasons.
Kirk's "arrogant rebel attitude" is only garnered because he stole and blew up the Enterprise, and maybe because of things like disobeying starfleet in Amok Time. Both choices he came to save his friends life. Again, not brought about by arrogance.
Kirk in the Abrams' movies is a product of his father being dead. That is readily apparent. Not having a father around can change your entire upbringing, and we know that Kirk's dad was a positive formative influence on him.
I would agree as well. Pine's Kirk is very much influenced by the cultural concept of Kirk which is based on the TOS films rather than TOS it's self. The guy who cheats on tests, isn't a boy scout and steals starships (for noble reasons) is the movie version of Kirk. That's the Kirk the writers of the newer films are basing their Kirk on. There are hints of that Kirk in TOS. The man who will openly defy Federation officals or play with the rules when he feels the cause is just. Never for selfish reasons though. His ship and friends usually come before his own needs.
There is a reason for this difference built into the films though. The new Kirk has a different childhood, with a dead father and seemingly absent mother. So I can see his baser instincts coming forward with out a role model to guide him. Pike and Starfleet are still shaping him into something closer to the man he became in the Prime Universe. Though I don't see the ladies man Kirk going away anytime soon.
The whole "insecure under the surface" concept of Kirk, which was admittedly dropped in the first season to a great degree, has been totally excised form his personality in these movies (is that the Hornblower aspect? I never read the stories). The Kirk I grew up watching was studious in the academy and overly serious. He wore the responsibility of the lives of his crew as something of a heavy burden. Shatner's good natured performance style added color and buoyancy to Kirk, but he was not the rule breaking, tail chaser he was made out to be.
None of this is in the current interpretation of the character. He's cocky in aways Kirk never was. He pretty much leers at any pretty ass he sees and is obvious about it ("Helloooo ladies..."). Shatner's Kirk was charming. Chris Pine's is simply horny. Pine is 35 but he plays Kirk as 17. The crew on the whole is written and played as college dudes on a road trip...in SPAAAAAACE!
Granted, the whole "Nero killed Kirk's dad and Jim grew up totally differently" changed everything. And I'm fine with it. But, really, this is not the Jim Kirk of the original series. It's just not. I agree that it's an amped up version of the reputation of Kirk.
As such, I don't like this version of the character. It doesn't capture the spirit of the original and he's frankly unlikeable to me. Pine's a solid actor, but the character is written in a way that I don't really enjoy. YMMV.
Having said all that, I enjoyed Into Darkness a great deal as its own entity and look forward to Beyond. I appreciated the growth they gave Kirk and hope he'll be closer to maturity when next we see him.
Do I miss the original crew? They had fine closure, so no, I'm good. They had a great run and I can watch them anytime I want to.
None of this is in the current interpretation of the character. He's cocky in aways Kirk never was. He pretty much leers at any pretty ass he sees and is obvious about it ("Helloooo ladies..."). Shatner's Kirk was charming. Chris Pine's is simply horny. Pine is 35 but he plays Kirk as 17. The crew on the whole is written and played as college dudes on a road trip...in SPAAAAAACE!
Granted, the whole "Nero killed Kirk's dad and Jim grew up totally differently" changed everything. And I'm fine with it. But, really, this is not the Jim Kirk of the original series. It's just not. I agree that it's an amped up version of the reputation of Kirk.
As such, I don't like this version of the character. It doesn't capture the spirit of the original and he's frankly unlikeable to me. Pine's a solid actor, but the character is written in a way that I don't really enjoy. YMMV.
Having said all that, I enjoyed Into Darkness a great deal as its own entity and look forward to Beyond. I appreciated the growth they gave Kirk and hope he'll be closer to maturity when next we see him.
Do I miss the original crew? They had fine closure, so no, I'm good. They had a great run and I can watch them anytime I want to.
I miss the original crew all the time, and wish they had made another hundred episodes and dozen movies, but things move on. I am grateful I have the opportunity to watch them whenever I want, and am thrilled to be able to read continued adventures in the form of novels. I am also happy that we have the new movies and look forward to more.
They've had their day (seriously, who else gets to play their role for 25+ years?), and as others have said, live on in countless novels and fanfic - some of which actually features the original actors reprising their roles.
Hard to say. I don't think any of us can predict what today's kids are going to remember fondly thirty years from now.
Surely nobody back in 1969 could have predicted that we'd still be watching a cancelled sci-fi show fifty years later!
Something to consider: When Bram Stoker died in 1912, his obituary predicted that he would be remembered for his monumental two-volume "Life of Irving" (as in Henry Irving). "Dracula" only rated one line near the bottom of the obituary.
Posterity can be fickle.
Last edited:
If there had been no TOS or it hadn't clicked with the right viewers then there would have been nothing else to follow it. If it had become like Lost In Space and remembered in a far reaching way then there still might have been the occasional reboot attempt and possibly quite different than JJtrek.
One can't ignore the context. The television landscape of the 1960s to 1980s was quite different than what it became during the past ten years. The handful of channels available had more reach than what is offered today simply because there were that many fewer options for the viewing public. In extent it was somewhat easier to find common ground across a broad spectrum of the viewing public.
Society was also different. The '60s was a mixture of anxiety and optimism. Despite many saying TOS was ahead of its time it was much more the right show at the right time to tap into the anxiety and optimism of the era. If TOS had come along at almost any time later rather than 1966-69 who can say whether it would have resonated or not? If TNG had been the first Star Trek rather than TOS would it have clicked the way it did? No one can really say, but I wonder of not part of TNG's draw was the fact it was building on the reach TOS had already established.
Take TOS out of the equation (assuming NBC didn't buy WNMHGB) and you could drastically affect the depiction of genre productions on television and perhaps even film.
In 2009 the television and film industry was much more fragmented than that of the 1960s to 1980s. One of the biggest criticisms with JJtrek is that it's so much like everything in the sci-fi/action genre. There really is little to distinguish it other than it having a familiar name and familiar references. It traded on TOS' recognition factor. If TOS hadn't existed to have the reach and recognition it had then what would there be to distinguish JJtrek from so much else being done at the time?
TOS was distinctive from the other genre programs being done at the time. But introduce TOS into the television landscape of the mid 1990s to 2009 and would it resonate the same way? Of course, that's assuming a similar television landscape as it currently exists, but if TOS isn't there in the 1960s we have no idea what happens with SF and genre programming in the ensuing decades.
One can't ignore the context. The television landscape of the 1960s to 1980s was quite different than what it became during the past ten years. The handful of channels available had more reach than what is offered today simply because there were that many fewer options for the viewing public. In extent it was somewhat easier to find common ground across a broad spectrum of the viewing public.
Society was also different. The '60s was a mixture of anxiety and optimism. Despite many saying TOS was ahead of its time it was much more the right show at the right time to tap into the anxiety and optimism of the era. If TOS had come along at almost any time later rather than 1966-69 who can say whether it would have resonated or not? If TNG had been the first Star Trek rather than TOS would it have clicked the way it did? No one can really say, but I wonder of not part of TNG's draw was the fact it was building on the reach TOS had already established.
Take TOS out of the equation (assuming NBC didn't buy WNMHGB) and you could drastically affect the depiction of genre productions on television and perhaps even film.
In 2009 the television and film industry was much more fragmented than that of the 1960s to 1980s. One of the biggest criticisms with JJtrek is that it's so much like everything in the sci-fi/action genre. There really is little to distinguish it other than it having a familiar name and familiar references. It traded on TOS' recognition factor. If TOS hadn't existed to have the reach and recognition it had then what would there be to distinguish JJtrek from so much else being done at the time?
TOS was distinctive from the other genre programs being done at the time. But introduce TOS into the television landscape of the mid 1990s to 2009 and would it resonate the same way? Of course, that's assuming a similar television landscape as it currently exists, but if TOS isn't there in the 1960s we have no idea what happens with SF and genre programming in the ensuing decades.
"J.J. Abrams has ruined LAND OF THE GIANTS! He has no respect for Irwin Allen's original vision!"
Thanks for the shout-out!
And, yeah, hard to miss the original crew when I'm writing them this very afternoon!
They're still very much with me.
Thanks for the shout-out!
And, yeah, hard to miss the original crew when I'm writing them this very afternoon!
They're still very much with me.
There are still people in Germany who cry out for more TOS novels to be released in German. Saidly to no avail. TOS novels don't sell..... The next German TOS novel is No Time Like the Past - and it contains Voyager characters......
I take what I can get.....
Okay, I overstepped my limits again, as this is, like Orphalesion would say, not the literature forum. There is a Greg Cox cross-over novel named No Time Like the Past.
Sorry for troubling you with litverse issues....
Oh, I get that it's litverse. But I still can't wrap my brain around mixing the two sets of characters together.
Then Greg Cox is the man for answers. And we had a thread down in the lit forum somewhere if you are interested....
Well, there was time-travel involved . . ..
http://en.memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/No_Time_Like_the_Past_(novel)
Similar threads
