Maybe so.
Is Star Trek "For Kids"?
- Thread starter Lysian
- Start date
It's worth bearing in mind that Star Trek was originally produced in the 1960s, when all broadcast television series, without exception, were expected to be suitable for all ages. Network "standards and practices" departments were very strict back then. It was considered provocative when Kirk said "let's get the hell out of here" at the end of "City on the Edge of Forever."
However, "suitable for all ages" is not the same thing as "aimed at children," and certainly doesn't mean "unsophisticated." The show was sophisticated enough for thoughtful adults, as is evident from the fan following it accumulated. At the same time, I started watching it (in reruns) at age seven, and I loved it from the start.
Twenty years later during the TNG era, things had loosened up a little bit — especially since it was produced for first-run syndication rather than a network — but not a lot. Again, the show (and its successors) were basically intended to be suitable for all ages. It wasn't really until the 21st century — thanks to direct-for-cable productions (Sopranos, Mad Men, Game of Thrones, etc.) and streaming (Netflix, etc.) — that any significant number of shows were targeted only at older audiences.
In that context, I would say DSC is trying to straddle a fence. It's not as sophisticated — nor as gruesome or explicit — as Game of Thrones sometimes is. On the other hand, it's also something that would probably go over the head of a typical seven-year-old. A smart twelve-year-old, on the other hand, would be another story.
Bottom line, I've always figured these things basically sort themselves out by subjective audience tastes (which is why I'm not a big fan of censorship or ratings systems). Basically anyone who's mature enough to understand the show, rather than being bored by it, is also mature enough to handle watching the show.
However, "suitable for all ages" is not the same thing as "aimed at children," and certainly doesn't mean "unsophisticated." The show was sophisticated enough for thoughtful adults, as is evident from the fan following it accumulated. At the same time, I started watching it (in reruns) at age seven, and I loved it from the start.
Twenty years later during the TNG era, things had loosened up a little bit — especially since it was produced for first-run syndication rather than a network — but not a lot. Again, the show (and its successors) were basically intended to be suitable for all ages. It wasn't really until the 21st century — thanks to direct-for-cable productions (Sopranos, Mad Men, Game of Thrones, etc.) and streaming (Netflix, etc.) — that any significant number of shows were targeted only at older audiences.
In that context, I would say DSC is trying to straddle a fence. It's not as sophisticated — nor as gruesome or explicit — as Game of Thrones sometimes is. On the other hand, it's also something that would probably go over the head of a typical seven-year-old. A smart twelve-year-old, on the other hand, would be another story.
Bottom line, I've always figured these things basically sort themselves out by subjective audience tastes (which is why I'm not a big fan of censorship or ratings systems). Basically anyone who's mature enough to understand the show, rather than being bored by it, is also mature enough to handle watching the show.
One could argue that a Ceti eel squirming its way into Chekov's ear is not for kids but I sure watched it when I was like 6 or 7 years old.
Saw TWOK in the theater with my dad when I was 6. Didn't scar me or even give me nightmares. That said, I wouldn't let my (current) 6 year old watch that scene.
I find the term "family show" to have as many definitions as the word "family" does, and most of them are just as subjective. Parents (or their analogues) have to make the best possible decision as to what the best possible viewing choices are for the children in the family, and they aren't always going to get those choices right.
Content creators are focused on profit, not on suitability, and the ONLY reason that content will be deliberately and voluntarily shaped to meet a culturally accepted standard of suitability for "families" is if there is some financial advantage in doing so - otherwise any suitability is accidental or the result of legal conformity (no nudity before a certain time, no FCC restricted curse words, etc.)
Content creators are focused on profit, not on suitability, and the ONLY reason that content will be deliberately and voluntarily shaped to meet a culturally accepted standard of suitability for "families" is if there is some financial advantage in doing so - otherwise any suitability is accidental or the result of legal conformity (no nudity before a certain time, no FCC restricted curse words, etc.)
I think Star Trek, like all space opera, should be a PG bordering on PG-13 affair. I watch Discovery and sometimes Dr. Who and I'm in wonder over how much graphic violence is in it. It rarely ever serves the plot and could be easily removed to make the points they want. Discovery, especially, is just plain not smart enough to exclude younger viewers with gore, torture, and graphic rape scenes.
Shouldn't the story they are trying to tell and how they tell it determine what audience it is acceptable for? Not the genre.
Yet there is so much less sex and violence in Discovery than TOS
I have seen numerous "MA" shows on the various streaming services that contain torture scenes and I can't recall more than one or two of them that actually made some sort of sense to the story.
As for sexual assault or violence, I find that intolerable. I have seen only one series that contained a rape (it took place off camera) and handled it properly and used it to advance the plot in a logical way (that was the BBC series Shetland).
As for sexual assault or violence, I find that intolerable. I have seen only one series that contained a rape (it took place off camera) and handled it properly and used it to advance the plot in a logical way (that was the BBC series Shetland).
Yet shows like ST and DW generally get PG or 12 certificates. And bear in mind DW even with all that "graphic violence" airs in an early evening prime time slot on a Saturday in the UK.
It's a rare occurrence that space shows like nuBSG or The Expanse comes along with story lines worthy of pushing out younger audiences. And, in many cases, aren't fantastical enough to call space opera, but rather way more serious in tone. Space opera, like Trek, Wars, or Who is dumbed down and over the top by their nature. Their story lines, while sometimes relevant and thought provoking, are still hokey. Their intelligence level isn't high enough to warrant extreme blood and guts. Same with Super Hero movies.
Really? TOS had people with their organs on the outside? Spinning blades splattering brains everywhere? Moaning, naked Klingons?
TOS had multiple portrayals of rape or sexual violence, torture and execution scenes were so common they had a designated theme tune for them, Kirk had on average one sexual partner for every four episodes and females costumes for non crew were frequently designed to go as close as possible as was allowed at the time to render the actress effectively naked.
Don't be fooled by the limitations of the special effects and the censorship issues, TOS was hell bent on taking things as far as they could and sex and violence occurred far more often than it does in Discovery.
I do think it's worth differentiating "explicit" and "implied."
I'm not going to argue with you about the even excessive for the time misogyny in TOS. It's why I don't show it to my kid today. But rape? Execution? Certainly not to an excessive every-episode degree. And if it did, I'd have the same complaints because two wrongs don't make a right. When TNG rapes Troi one or twice a season I'm not happy with that either. Simple morality plays with laser guns aren't sophisticated enough to warrant regular amounts of blood and gore. That's a teenager's idea of sophistication. But, to the point you made, in no way did TOS have more graphic violence than Discovery, even, by your own admission, if it was due to censorship. Even percentage-wise I don't think you can make the case as Discovery has it in really every single episode.
I didn't claim it does, I didn't claim it doesn't, I merely made a factual statement. If you doubt me rewatch TOS and get a feel for the point, executions, serious violence, torture, rape and sex were commonplace enough that I challenge you to find an episode without at least one in.
Corbomite Maneuver, Shore Leave, Squire of Gothos, Tomorrow is Yesterday, Court Martial, Alternative Factor, Doomsday Machine, Cat's PAw, I, Mudd, Metamorphosis, The Deadly Years, Trouble With Tribbles, A Peice of the Action, Immunity Syndrome, The Ultimate Computer, Assignment: Earth, The Enterprise Incident, The Mark of Gideon, Requiem for Methulelah, All Our Yesterdays, Turnabout Intruder.
That's nearly 30% of the show. I was very strict with that list, not including episodes like Spock's Brain, or Dagger of the Mind where "torture" is flailing around in pain or Errand of Mercy where executions are off screen and not even real. I'd say, under those conditions I could get this list to 50%. In most cases where something is not on the list it simply is not graphic violence but implied. And there is a huge difference between the two. You can't compare someone disappearing in phaser blast with brain splatter, blades cutting into flesh, and someone stopping a skull flat.
Enterprise Incident: multiple incidents of serious ship violence with intent to kill
Doomsday Machine: massacre of a starship crew and serious violence with intent to kill
A Piece of the Action: serious violence between rival gangs and open discussion of extortion
Ultimate Computer: 1600 starfleet crew killed in action
Enterprise Incident: Serious ship to ship violence with intent to kill, use of seduction to maipulate, execution ordered but escaped
Turnabout Intruder: Murder and attempted murder
I Mudd: blatant sexual content
Shore Leave: fatal use of violence
Mark of Gideon: sex
Reqiuem for Methuselah: a fight to the death interrupted by the on screen death of a third character, overt references to both real life and fictional massacres and war crimes
Need I go on?
The only difference is how graphically these things CAN be shown, not the intent.
I'm not making a value judgement either way, but the suggestion TOS was a show intended or suitable for children is unrealistic in the extreme.
Doomsday Machine: massacre of a starship crew and serious violence with intent to kill
A Piece of the Action: serious violence between rival gangs and open discussion of extortion
Ultimate Computer: 1600 starfleet crew killed in action
Enterprise Incident: Serious ship to ship violence with intent to kill, use of seduction to maipulate, execution ordered but escaped
Turnabout Intruder: Murder and attempted murder
I Mudd: blatant sexual content
Shore Leave: fatal use of violence
Mark of Gideon: sex
Reqiuem for Methuselah: a fight to the death interrupted by the on screen death of a third character, overt references to both real life and fictional massacres and war crimes
Need I go on?
The only difference is how graphically these things CAN be shown, not the intent.
I'm not making a value judgement either way, but the suggestion TOS was a show intended or suitable for children is unrealistic in the extreme.
Sorry, but you’re trying to make a straw man argument with consensual, nongraphic sexual encounters, ships pewing at each other, and fist fights. Intent is meaningless to this discussion. Graphic nature is the point. That, after all, is the difference between Star Wars and Saving Private Ryan. And yet one is friendlier for family viewing than the other. They only thing you have going for you the possibility that if censorship was laxer they’d have gone more graphic, and, considering TNG, and the fact that much of TOS’s audience was kids, that’s may not have been the case. It’s only speculation.
Just checked the OP, no mention of graphic content one way or the other whatsoever, it isn't the point at all. That might be what YOU are discussing, but the actual thread we are posting in is about whether trek is or ever has been a kids show, not whether it has or has not been graphic in it's content.
So no, you are making a strawman argument, not me.
I’m discussing what you’re discussing, which is that TOS had more graphic violence than Discovery. If you think that’s off topic the you shouldn’t have brought it up.
Similar threads
