• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Another attempt at Re-animation!

Personally, I think the only things wrong with TAS were that the episodes were not as long as a TOS episode, no Chekov or Rand, and not enough guest actors playing guest characters.

I wouldn't mind if voice actors wanted to have a pop at the guest characters and if scenes were added or extended to pad the episodes to 40 minutes and if Chekov and Rand appeared in a couple of episodes per season.

And wth are those field effect suits? Why didn't they keep some version of those in subsequent versions of Trek?
 
Last edited:
Filmation didn't have enough money to even bring Walter Koenig in as a cast member. Ain't no way they would've bothered with Grace Lee Whitney or any memorable guest voices at that point. That's why Nichelle, Jimmy, and Majel did so many additional voices.

The show wasn't intended as an hour-long series. It was always going to be a half-hour Saturday morning cartoon.
 
Filmation didn't have enough money to even bring Walter Koenig in as a cast member. Ain't no way they would've bothered with Grace Lee Whitney or any memorable guest voices at that point. That's why Nichelle, Jimmy, and Majel did so many additional voices.

The show wasn't intended as an hour-long series. It was always going to be a half-hour Saturday morning cartoon.
The fact that we got Stanley Adams, Roger Carmel and Mark Lenard was a damned miracle. Not to mention Ted Knight and Ed Bishop - not that they were big starts at this point but they were beyond the Filmation stable of regulars.
 
They make sense as a high tech, short term emergency piece of kit to plug a crack in a visor, protect against unforseen hazards. In how many episodes could it have saved lives?
 
The show wasn't intended as an hour-long series. It was always going to be a half-hour Saturday morning cartoon.
I think Gene Roddenberry wanted TAS to be a prime time show, like The Flintstones had been (and The Simpsons etc. would one day be), and he was disappointed at the Saturday morning slot.
 
The life-support-belt "halos" were an animation shortcut so that stock character cels could be used without the time and expense of having to draw and animate spacesuits.
These for me fall into a category that I'm not sure what to call. Probably TV Tropes has a name for it that's a lot pithier than "plot-solving free miracle tech". Science fiction shows can easily fall into the trap of creating a gizmo for a specific script that has a negative credibility implication for the series as a whole. "If they have this, why don't they keep using it? Why didn't they use it back when x, y, and z happened? Why isn't it standard procedure?" A great example is the subcutaneous transponders in Patterns of Force. Why on earth not make those part of the SOP for all landing parties?

Writers that are good at thinking through their plot give things like this an in-story reason why they were only used once. An obvious drawback or cost. A hard-to-replace object that gets depleted. A consequence that only becomes apparent after that one use. A sacrifice paid to make it work. Otherwise the main characters just look like morons for not equipping themselves on every mission with emergency recall transponders that can't be stolen by the natives, and magic life-support-halo belts that save them from all manner of hazards. Oh yeah, and of course a few doses of kironide from Platonius!

Brad Wright's writing team seemed to put a lot of thought into the limitations of their miracle tech. In the Stargate franchise, the gates (whose features are partly from the movie and partly from Wright's team) can teleport you to countless other planets in our galaxy (and a couple of others), but they can only travel in one direction at a time, don't guarantee you can come back, can't be kept open for more than 38 minutes, require a unique access code for every destination, etc. These limitations aid the suspension of disbelief, and create plenty of room for things to go wrong and for clever plots to unfold.

Also impressive to me is the list of restrictions on the time travel model used in the Netflix series Travelers: you can only go backward in time so it's always a one-way trip; you have to have precise four-dimensional coordinates (time, elevation, latitude, longitude); you can't ever go back any farther than the latest jump, so no undoing your mistakes before they happened; you have to do extensive research first, because every jump is guaranteed to impact the timeline by the very nature of how it works; repeated jumps to or from the same person take a physical/mental toll; and so on. That was an exceptionally smart show, and the care they put into limitations really paid off dramatically.

So anyway, that was a long-winded way to say I'm glad that Star Trek forgot it had the life-support halo. It's one of those magic tech gizmos that just isn't dramatically sustainable. It solves way too many problems with no apparent cost or other downside.
 
So anyway, that was a long-winded way to say I'm glad that Star Trek forgot it had the life-support halo. It's one of those magic tech gizmos that just isn't dramatically sustainable. It solves way too many problems with no apparent cost or other downside.

Well, that's completely untrue. Force-field dampeners are a sci-fi staple and exist in Star Trek.


One of those could completely ruin your day if you're using in a life-support belt in a hard vacuum. If I were writing for the show and had to cope with that scenario, I'd posit that the belt could hold a static charge for a period of time even without a working power generator, as a safety mechanism. (Otherwise it would be too stupid to rely on exclusively.)

Moreover, Star Trek has "survived" many plot devices that were introduced to simplify production and/or story construction: transporters and warp drive being the two most important. They can either magically save the day or be completely negated, as the story demands.

On the gripping hand, at least since TNG, live-action Trek has essentially used the technology, even when not in the form of a belt. When the ship has taken damage, force fields are commonly used to seal off areas of the ship that would otherwise be open to space.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top