TOS: Showing, not Telling.

[fireproof78]

I think one thing I have noticed with prequels is the fact that stories are often "known" or "known" well enough that keeping the story interesting and fresh is the greatest challenge. I think that Rogue One could suffer a similar fate if they don't try to come at the the angle that the audience has not seen this before. The Death Star reveal in the trailer is actually well done because it treats it still like a big deal, like we haven't seen it before. and it's still a threat.

Contrast that to the PT where lots of things are taken for granted that the audience knows what everything is, from lightsabers to droids to Obi-Wan and Anakin being friends. The PT doesn't treat it like its "new" but as a given and used pretty visuals instead of building characters.

Enterprise suffered a similar fate. The characters were set up as a dynamic like TOS, because, "Star Trek!" but didn't always have the chemistry to carry the show. Factor in weird technobabble and you have a strange mash up that didn't quite hit the prequel tone.

 

[Anwar]

Let's be fair here, the chemistry between Shater/Nimoy/Kelly? The thing that kept the show watchable more than the plots and anything else?

It was dumb luck they got it so good so fast. Chemistry isn't really an easy thing to find or produce.

 

[Terok Nor]

Can anyone think of any prequels on tv or in movies that were critically successful and embraced by fans? I'm sure there must be a few but I'm drawing a blank.

 

[Anwar]

Can anyone think of any prequels on tv or in movies that were critically successful and embraced by fans? I'm sure there must be a few but I'm drawing a blank.

Godfather part 2? It was a flashback to Vito's rise to power wasn't it?

 

[Kor]

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom was a prequel in the sense that it took place chronologically before Raiders of the Lost Ark. But it was a standalone story that had nothing to do with the first movie.

Kor

 

[Terok Nor]

Godfather part 2? It was a flashback to Vito's rise to power wasn't it?

True, but it was also a sequel showing us Michael's storyline so I'd consider it a mixture of both. I can't think of any standalone prequels that did anything for me.

Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom was a prequel in the sense that it took place chronologically before Raiders of the Lost Ark. But it was a standalone story that had nothing to do with the first movie.

Kor

True. Being a prequel didn't really matter in this case. I know people have issues with this movie but it being a prequel isn't one as far as I know.

 

[BillJ]

Well, yes. That was also a big issue. But you can't deny that the TOSers (sorry Brits) were upset at the "desecration" with showing how what was supposed to be the past of TOS resembling a pre-TNG era.

Then again, the NuTrek movies got away with having everything look even more advanced than TNG with its set designs. Enterprise would've been better off saying they were also just restarting the Trekverse without claiming this was the same timeline.

Star Trek just had to give way to better real world and film making technology. Anyone looking for a prequel or modern interpretation of TOS to look like what it was fifty years ago, was/is bound to be disappointed. A Hollywood production that tried to emulate the look and tech would get laughed off the screen.

 

[Kor]

There was also the "Young Indiana Jones Chronicles" TV series. It did a much better job of providing backstory than ST:ENT, that's for sure.

Well, yes. That was also a big issue. But you can't deny that the TOSers (sorry Brits) were upset at the "desecration" with showing how what was supposed to be the past of TOS resembling a pre-TNG era.

Then again, the NuTrek movies got away with having everything look even more advanced than TNG with its set designs. Enterprise would've been better off saying they were also just restarting the Trekverse without claiming this was the same timeline.

Actually, I thought there was a lot of retro-futurism in the NuTrek designs.

Kor

 

[uniderth]

Star Trek just had to give way to better real world and film making technology. Anyone looking for a prequel or modern interpretation of TOS to look like what it was fifty years ago, was/is bound to be disappointed. A Hollywood production that tried to emulate the look and tech would get laughed off the screen.

Well, they knew that back in the 70's when working on The Motion Picture.

But back to show/don't show topic. Another interesting way of allowing viewers to use their imaginations to fill in the gaps is not just with back story; but when they told us what was currently happening, rather than showing us. I, Mudd comes to mind. When the android shoves Scotty into the room and says, "This is the last one." We get to imagine what it looked like having the androids evacuate the crew from the ship.

The Bowling Alley could be another example.

 

[Anwar]

Star Trek just had to give way to better real world and film making technology. Anyone looking for a prequel or modern interpretation of TOS to look like what it was fifty years ago, was/is bound to be disappointed. A Hollywood production that tried to emulate the look and tech would get laughed off the screen.

Then why were there so many complaints over how Enterprise didn't look like TOS?

 

[fireproof78]

Let's be fair here, the chemistry between Shater/Nimoy/Kelly? The thing that kept the show watchable more than the plots and anything else?

It was dumb luck they got it so good so fast. Chemistry isn't really an easy thing to find or produce.

I think that there were a number of elements that mad TOS work, with chemistry being among them. But, the stories were certainly enjoyable as well.

Then why were there so many complaints over how Enterprise didn't look like TOS?

Can I jump in here to add that people, in general, will complain about anything? I mean, I have several friends who are hunters and to listen to some of their stories you would think it was the most miserable experience they've ever had, even though they look forward to doing it again. See this humor article as an exaggeration of that fact.

Also, if ENT had characters and chemistry in anyway that were more enjoyable, rather than a surface level attempt to capture TOS style interactions without that level with the cast. TNG and DS9 manage to breakaway from the TOS trifecta model, somewhat, and were more successful. VOY was hit and miss but manage to gain some traction, but ENT really struggled with sidelining cast members and relying on Archer, T'Pol and Tucker, but their interaction was mostly stereotypes.

Had that not been the case, and they had more organic interactions, then I think the tech differences would fade to the background. As it stands, the differences are more stark because of the lack of enjoyment.

 

[BillJ]

Then why were there so many complaints over how Enterprise didn't look like TOS?

Think I covered that...

Anyone looking for a prequel or modern interpretation of TOS to look like what it was fifty years ago, was/is bound to be disappointed.

Those were the people complaining.

It didn't help that the show wasn't very good for the first couple of seasons.

 

[FormerLurker]

This is actually my biggest complaint with Continues and Phase II/New Voyages. it's possible to continue the design ethic while adapting to known advances in technology. They just aren't doing it. Instead, they're just going back to the original and copying it, warts and all. I'd be much more impressed if their set design, at least, gave us a glimpse of how TOS would look if the original had been prescient enough to know what today's technology looks like.

 

[uniderth]

This is actually my biggest complaint with Continues and Phase II/New Voyages. it's possible to continue the design ethic while adapting to known advances in technology. They just aren't doing it. Instead, they're just going back to the original and copying it, warts and all. I'd be much more impressed if their set design, at least, gave us a glimpse of how TOS would look if the original had been prescient enough to know what today's technology looks like.

Which of course will look out dated in 50 years. But I guess by then we'll have warp drive wont we, so time will tell.

Actually I like that Star Trek isn't too pushy with technology. Sure you can say it looks dated, but there's plenty of opportunity for the behind the scenes mechanics of it all to be much more advanced than ours.

 

[fireproof78]

This is actually my biggest complaint with Continues and Phase II/New Voyages. it's possible to continue the design ethic while adapting to known advances in technology. They just aren't doing it. Instead, they're just going back to the original and copying it, warts and all. I'd be much more impressed if their set design, at least, gave us a glimpse of how TOS would look if the original had been prescient enough to know what today's technology looks like.

I know there was a project out there that did a digital replacement of the TOS panels to me more LCD based technology which is a unique take, given TOS's original setup.

I don't really mind TOS look and don't expect them to be that forward looking when it comes to technology. I mean, there is only so far that people can imagine technology, I think that TOS could certainly be reimagined in a similar vein, with a similar backstory that Earth survived a war and united afterwards, but allowing future technology to be inspired by current trends.

I'm sure this isn't a new idea, but I wouldn't mind seeing it.

 

[Shawnster]

I think that there were a number of elements that mad TOS work, with chemistry being among them. But, the stories were certainly enjoyable as well.


Can I jump in here to add that people, in general, will complain about anything? I mean, I have several friends who are hunters and to listen to some of their stories you would think it was the most miserable experience they've ever had, even though they look forward to doing it again. See this humor article as an exaggeration of that fact.

Also, if ENT had characters and chemistry in anyway that were more enjoyable, rather than a surface level attempt to capture TOS style interactions without that level with the cast. TNG and DS9 manage to breakaway from the TOS trifecta model, somewhat, and were more successful. VOY was hit and miss but manage to gain some traction, but ENT really struggled with sidelining cast members and relying on Archer, T'Pol and Tucker, but their interaction was mostly stereotypes.

Had that not been the case, and they had more organic interactions, then I think the tech differences would fade to the background. As it stands, the differences are more stark because of the lack of enjoyment.

To add to this... for me, personally, it wasn't the look of ENT that turned me off. I understand they weren't going to make a series in the late 90s/early 00s that would look even more retro than TOS. What turned me off (although I watched every single episode) was that they tried to make ENT "too familiar" or gave us concepts and terms that were similar, if not identical, to what we were comfortable with from the rest of Trek. Phase pistols instead of phasers, or photonic torpedoes instead of Photon torpedoes as if those terms were different enough yet still the same enough to sound like Trek. The powers that be tried too hard to play it safe with giving the audience what they expected.

What would have been wrong with giving us laser pistols, nuclear torpedoes, not one single transporter, a ship other than the "Enterprise" and so forth? It could have felt older, set 100 years before TOS while still looking like it did.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Star Trek just had to give way to better real world and film making technology. Anyone looking for a prequel or modern interpretation of TOS to look like what it was fifty years ago, was/is bound to be disappointed. A Hollywood production that tried to emulate the look and tech would get laughed off the screen.

Yet in DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" and ENT's "In a Mirror, Darkly" both extensively featured the TOS exteriors/interiors alongside the current tech/design of both series, but the TOS designs were celebrated for how beautiful they were with then-current production standards (mainly camera/lighting). If TOS' appearances in those series was not seen as archaic or laughable, it stands to reason a new series using TOS exteriors/interiors would work. The greatest challenge would be stories to match the power of that written for TOS.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

What would have been wrong with giving us laser pistols, nuclear torpedoes, not one single transporter, a ship other than the "Enterprise" and so forth? It could have felt older, set 100 years before TOS while still looking like it did.

I think it would've been fun if they embraced the whole Forbidden Planet aesthetic and made it look like 1950s science fiction. That would've been remarkably noncommercial, though.

 

[Longinus]

I think it would've been fun if they embraced the whole Forbidden Planet aesthetic and made it look like 1950s science fiction. That would've been remarkably noncommercial, though.

I'd have loved that!

 

[fireproof78]

Yet in DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" and ENT's "In a Mirror, Darkly" both extensively featured the TOS exteriors/interiors alongside the current tech/design of both series, but the TOS designs were celebrated for how beautiful they were with then-current production standards (mainly camera/lighting). If TOS' appearances in those series was not seen as archaic or laughable, it stands to reason a new series using TOS exteriors/interiors would work. The greatest challenge would be stories to match the power of that written for TOS.

I think the greater challenge would be the actors carrying a similar level of enthusiasm to those scripts. There is no mistaking Shatner's energy or the humor that often accompanied their work, which is not always the case, depending on the casting. Obviously, there is more to it than that, but some of the stories written for TOS were either awful or too on the nose in terms of their message.

By the way, as an aside, I do wonder if the TOS aesthetic would carry for an entire series under modern productions. It was celebrated for one or two episodes but I wonder at the longevity.