Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread

[Rahul]

You say that except...there are small data points that will be held against these actors just like the familiar characters. Regardless of how brief there comes an expectation of this character to be exactly the same. Pike has managed because Mount has charmed people and there is a measure forgiveness. But, that grace is very thin, at least for me.

I actually think Anson Mount doesn't do a good job channeling Pike. His Pike is very, very different - lots of swagger, very warm, charming, almost Kirk-like - compared to the original very cold, introspective, somewhat sad Jeffrey Hunter.

It's just easy to overlook for me because I'm absolutely seduced by Mounts charm and frankly prefer him as a leading character. But a big part is that I'm not very emotionally connected to Hunters original performance.

For Uhura that will be different and more difficult. I absolutely love Nichelle Nicols performance. Zoe Saldana is a fine actress, but I had already difficulties. This new actors also seems nice. But I absolutely don't see Uhura in her. I would 100% prefer keeping the same actress but just giving her a new name.

I don't even want to imagine my problems seeing another Kirk on this show... I just don't think that's a good idea.

"Batman" is a legacy character that can be interpreted by many different actors. "Kirk" is a character that was at least 50% pure Shatner, brought alive in the first place by this very specific actor and his mannerisms. Recasting him is bound to fail like recasting "Magnum" or "McGuyver" with new faces.

There is no good solution for any actor - either they stay too far away from the original. Or they veer too close to parody.
What Chris Pine & Zachary Quinto did was nothing short of a miracle - and STILL irked many.

 

[fireproof78]

I actually think Anson Mount doesn't do a good job channeling Pike. His Pike is very, very different - lots of swagger, very warm, charming, almost Kirk-like - compared to the original very cold, introspective, somewhat sad Jeffrey Hunter.

It's just easy to overlook for me because I'm absolutely seduced by Mounts charm and frankly prefer him as a leading character. But a big part is that I'm not very emotionally connected to Hunters original performance.

For Uhura that will be different and more difficult. I absolutely love Nichelle Nicols performance. Zoe Saldana is a fine actress, but I had already difficulties. This new actors also seems nice. But I absolutely don't see Uhura in her. I would 100% prefer keeping the same actress but just giving her a new name.

I don't even want to imagine my problems seeing another Kirk on this show... I just don't think that's a good idea.

"Batman" is a legacy character that can be interpreted by many different actors. "Kirk" is a character that was at least 50% pure Shatner, brought alive in the first place by this very specific actor and his mannerisms. Recasting him is bound to fail like recasting "Magnum" or "McGuyver" with new faces.

There is no good solution for any actor - either they stay too far away from the original. Or they veer too close to parody.
What Chris Pine & Zachary Quinto did was nothing short of a miracle - and STILL irked many.

See I am quite different on Pike. I was very emotionally connected with Pike and he resonates with me as someone who was facing a crisis and had to get through it. Mount's Pike strikes me as the logical outcome of Pike successfully overcoming his depression (because that's what it was in The Cage).

As for the rest, I have no issues with recasting. That's the nature of the business. I thought Pine and co. did amazing in recognizing that pitfall of that balancing act, as you note, avoiding pitfall, while still having a measure of original mannerisms.

My biggest question when people say "I don't see X person in the new actor" is what does that look like in an individual? For instance, I would say that I would look completely different to people due to a lot of changes that have happened to me in the last five years, much less ten. So, I always balance that expectation against the very real aspect of people growing in to a persona rather than always being that way.

It's sometimes why prequels can rub the wrong way is we expect these characters to be static rather than dynamic and capable of growth and change and development, and being wrong. There is such a fascinating expectation from audiences, myself included of what a character should be, because humans are not always so consistent.

 

[Rahul]

See I am quite different on Pike. I was very emotionally connected with Pike and he resonates with me as someone who was facing a crisis and had to get through it. Mount's Pike strikes me as the logical outcome of Pike successfully overcoming his depression (because that's what it was in The Cage).

As for the rest, I have no issues with recasting. That's the nature of the business. I thought Pine and co. did amazing in recognizing that pitfall of that balancing act, as you note, avoiding pitfall, while still having a measure of original mannerisms.

My biggest question when people say "I don't see X person in the new actor" is what does that look like in an individual? For instance, I would say that I would look completely different to people due to a lot of changes that have happened to me in the last five years, much less ten. So, I always balance that expectation against the very real aspect of people growing in to a persona rather than always being that way.

It's sometimes why prequels can rub the wrong way is we expect these characters to be static rather than dynamic and capable of growth and change and development, and being wrong. There is such a fascinating expectation from audiences, myself included of what a character should be, because humans are not always so consistent.

Tbh sometimes it's just random. "Magnum" for example doesn't work without a beard for me.

You could have put Henry Cavil in the reboot - a person that is a very, very different persona than Tom Selleck. And I would have given him a chance because of his magnificent beard.

Jay Hernandez though? No chance. That guy might have been all kinds of talented and great at channeling Sellecks charm - without the beard he just didn't work for me & the Magnum reboot failed to resonate with me.

With Kirk, Spock & all others it might be more subtle. But no matter what - these characters are so iconic, one little thing that's off is enough to make me not accept them. And I don't even know what that might be.

 

[Mudd]

No problem with any of the characters being there.

 

[cooleddie74]

M'Benga's the one I'm the most excited about. He's been such a mystery since TOS. Two appearances. He seemed to have a good stewardship over Sickbay and knew what he was doing. Even knew things about Vulcan physiology. Two appearances in the late '60s never seemed like they were enough.

 

[fireproof78]

With Kirk, Spock & all others it might be more subtle. But no matter what - these characters are so iconic, one little thing that's off is enough to make me not accept them. And I don't even know what that might be.

That is probably the hardest part and might illustrate why I am so hesistant with more and more legacy characters. While I am fully open to change in some aspects of the character, you are basically adding and adding to the point that the possibility of one little thing might happen that hits me sideways, but, like you, what it might be is quite difficult to describe what it might be. So, saying that all these legacy characters are a good thing, no matter how minor, opens up difficulties for me.

 

[Rahul]

M'Benga's the one I'm the most excited about. He's been such a mystery since TOS. Two appearances. He seemed to have a good stewardship over Sickbay and knew what he was doing. Even knew things about Vulcan physiology. Two appearances in the late '60s never seemed like they were enough.

I'm super excited for M'Benga as well. As with Pike though NOT because I'm that much interested in the original character - I'm just a giant fan of Babs Olusanmokun!

 

[El Maestro]

It's partially small universe syndrome, but it's mostly just feels workman like, like we are hitting off the checkmarks to make sure it is "Trek Enough" to satisfy the requirements. It also creates a lot of expectations of how the characters are supposed to be rather than new characters who can be more accepted as is.

Ok, I appreciate that. I’m not sure I agree or at least see it as being as much of a problem as you do, but I can understand the logic.

Aren’t legacy characters largely unavoidable on a show like this? It involves the 1701 before Kirk with a captain who himself is a minor legacy character that we canonically know was involved with other major legacy characters.

 

[fireproof78]

Ok, I appreciate that. I’m not sure I agree or at least see it as being as much of a problem as you do, but I can understand the logic.

Aren’t legacy characters largely unavoidable on a show like this? It involves the 1701 before Kirk with a captain who himself is a minor legacy character that we canonically know was involved with other major legacy characters.

Unavoidable? Maybe. It requires more effort in being creative, in my opinion, and the world could be expanded in the process. It's kind of similar to the TNG problem-these people have careers at the same rank for 7 years, and are all together and on the same ship. At some point it time it just looks odd.

 

[Rahul]

Ok, I appreciate that. I’m not sure I agree or at least see it as being as much of a problem as you do, but I can understand the logic.

Aren’t legacy characters largely unavoidable on a show like this? It involves the 1701 before Kirk with a captain who himself is a minor legacy character that we canonically know was involved with other major legacy characters.

Kind of. I think the (accidental) genius of the premise of this show was - it's kind of a reboot of TOS - without actually being a reboot, and this circumventing a lot of the usual troubles of reboots (like the original version being the more accepted and known version).

They got the benefits of doing something familiar, without the risk of getting something very well known wrong.

Of course, introducing more and more legacy characters of course weakens that original premise, and brings as dangerously close to the controversial "straight up reboot" waters.

 

[1001001]

No problem with any of the characters being there.

YOU'RE NOT FAN BOYING HARD ENOUGH!!!

 

[Nerys Myk]

Play with all the toys in box.

 

[Mudd]

YOU'RE NOT FAN BOYING HARD ENOUGH!!!

Trust me, I am fanboying harder than I have in nearly a quarter of a century.

Or maybe it's just the pills. I dunno...

 

[Rahul]

Trust me, I am fanboying harder than I have in nearly a quarter of a century.

Or maybe it's just the pills. I dunno...

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[NCC-73515]

So, why do the graphics displays show the Enterprise having straight TOS pylons?

Here's an idea: They can move
Like Voyager, they have adaptive warp field features or whatever XD

 

[Rahul]

Here's an idea: They can move
Like Voyager, they have adaptive warp field features or whatever XD

Straight pylons getting installed on Tuesday.

 

[NCC-73515]

They should put an option to select before each episode:
- The Changeling's favorite changed Enterprise
- The Continuum's preferred unchanged Enterprise

 

[Captain Moe]

Next one is up

https://twitter.com/StarTrek/status/1509305085150392324?t=EMFwQK80UZbkIraXDj2egg&s=19

 

[thribs]

I watched the Aenar one. That uniform Uhura is wearing looks like something from STO

 

[cooleddie74]

The control panel Hemmer is operating is very TOS. There's even something that looks like the TOS wall and console commpanel.