• 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!

The Captain HAS To Be Human...

Pardon, but "wrong" isn't a very compelling argument. :p

You were doing much better in your previous post, but you're still going around my point. My point is not as much about whether a good story could be made with an alien captain - obviously it can, and some of the Captain Spock stuff in the DC Comics run is some of my favorite Trek. But I'm heavily invested in the mythos of Trek, too. My point is about what it takes to get a general audience to watch - which is needed for a show-sustaining level of ratings.

Yep. Like I said, there are two separate issues. What a general audience wants and what more in depth fans want.
 
I think it has been said that the audience has to identify with the main character(s). If the writers can do that with aliens, then so be it, let them be aliens.

They did this with Spock and they did it with Data. If the character is well written, then it really doesn't matter.
 
Of course the main character and the majority of characters have to be human - that's blindingly obvious, except to hard-core fans.

Well, many would view Spock as the main character in the classic series. And, aside from Picard, Worf and Data were the most popular in TNG. The Doctor and Seven of Nine (a human turned Borg drone) were probably the most popular in VOY, while Dax, Quark, Odo and Kira had their fans in DS9.

Outside of Trek, Angel had a vampire for a lead, Superman is an alien, Thor is a god (or alien in the new movie), aliens have been the lead in the likes of The Day The Earth Stood Still and Starman, the Terminator sequels focussed on the cybernetic title character because of his popularity (the human-centric T4 was the least successful), then you have the popularity of Star Wars' various droids and aliens, etc.

So what's so blindingly obvious?
 
I think it's possible for there to be a half-Human/half-Vulcan captain, especially if the character leans more towards his or her Human side in both personality and appearance (no bowl haircut or upswept eyebrows, but definitely with pointed ears). The character could be more like how Spock was in Star Treks II, V, and VI--more zen-like (unflappable in any situation, yet not distant and cold) than anything else, IMO. The captain's last name would be Human in origin, but his or her first name could be Vulcan perhaps...
 
Well, many would view Spock as the main character in the classic series. And, aside from Picard, Worf and Data were the most popular in TNG. The Doctor and Seven of Nine (a human turned Borg drone) were probably the most popular in VOY, while Dax, Quark, Odo and Kira had their fans in DS9.
I'll grant you that Spock was part of the main triumverate of characters in TOS - but really, I think it would be hard to argue against the main-est character being Kirk. The actions of Spock and McCoy both really seemed to mostly revolve around him, up to and including playing "devil and angel on your shoulder" with him sometimes. Also, it is hard to lump TOS in with the rest of what I'm talking about, because getting a feel for ratings was harder back then, and even the ratings they had seemed to indicate that Trek was a bit of a niche market then - which is why it only lasted two years before getting cancelled (and then being allowed an encore season by demand of geeks like us. ;))

Some of the things I'm about to say would be offensive to the characters that they are about, so sorry for that, but: Worf was portrayed, at heart, as a human (albeit maybe a samurai) looking in on "his" people and not truly understanding most of them. Data's character was almost entirely about trying to learn what it is to be human - which is still the human adventure, really. Ditto for The Doctor and 7 of 9, but also, as badly as Voyager was doing at the point where they brought Seven onto the show, I really kinda think that any "strategy" for ratings that involved them took the form of flailing about at a crap shoot. Dax was a long-lived human (or several) with spots - and hot, which always helps. Kira was a human with a funny nose from a civilization that seemed to me to be meant to be Israel with funny names. Quark was another Worf-like character, looking back in on his own race with human eyes - only instead of a samurai, he was a (probably offensive stereotype of a) Jewish merchant.

Odo has probably been the most truly alien alien that Trek has seen as a regular castmember - and even then, his story still takes the form of human (okay, "Bajoran" - still human) looking at his own people.

And none of these has been the main character - with the possible exception of 7 and The Doctor, because as I said before, Voyager kinda lost its way - pun painfully intended. :devil:

Angel was a human - vampires are still humans, just undead and cursed, but the main theme of his story most of the time was trying to get back to what it means to be human. Clark is an adopted human - he has powers and an alien background, but ultimately, he's a farmboy from Kansas. The rest of the characters that you mentioned don't really count because they were either single movies or movie series with episodes space a few years apart or more. Some of the popularity of those movies can be chalked up to theater-worthy effects, the general public's willingness to occasionally indulge in something that they regard as silly or nonsensical, or a really good single script. But this isn't about what can make a good, single story. It is about what will make a compelling series of stories that will keep an audience tuned in to a serial television program for half of each year (26 episodes) for 7 years. And for that, you need "the human adventure", it really does seem to me.
 
^ I don't disagree with your analysis of the characters I've named; pretty spot-on, all round.

I think the point is that viewers will respond to well-written, well defined engaging characters of whatever race. Anyway, none of the Trek aliens are really all that alien anyway. Each represents some aspect of the human condition and all look pretty humanoid. Stuart Baird thought Geordi was an alien, FFS! I'm not saying the captain in any future Trek series HAS to be an alien but if he's an interesting character, who gets to appear in interesting stories, audiences will not be turned off because he's Klingon/ Vulcan/ Andorian/ whatever.
 
^ I don't disagree with your analysis of the characters I've named; pretty spot-on, all round.

I think the point is that viewers will respond to well-written, well defined engaging characters of whatever race. Anyway, none of the Trek aliens are really all that alien anyway. Each represents some aspect of the human condition and all look pretty humanoid. Stuart Baird thought Geordi was an alien, FFS! I'm not saying the captain in any future Trek series HAS to be an alien but if he's an interesting character, who gets to appear in interesting stories, audiences will not be turned off because he's Klingon/ Vulcan/ Andorian/ whatever.

Well said. I agree 100%.
 
I have to disagree with the original poster regarding the use of an alien Captain as the main character. Exclusion isn't what "Star Trek" has been about. An alien captain would be the next step in the franchise's evolution...and a series target audience would be the fans. This is isn't like a movie where you have you write around a general audience that knows next to nothing about Star Trek. Yes I'm a hardcore Star Trek fan but I'm also not ignorant enough to think that an alien Captain wouldn't be an interesting character just because we as humans can't or find it difficult to relate to him/her. Star Trek while wide reaching as a franchise normally only attracts an audience of a few million a week. Ultimately the human stories are what will be told as this series unfolds. It really doesn't matter who you have as the main character as long as the stories are interesting. The best Star Trek stories in the past have been the ones which have touched on contemporary issues. A series like "Battlestar Galactica" I don't think pandered to a general audience, especially being on a network like SyFy. Having something that pertains to a general audience is the preview of a motion picture. Not a television series.
 
I think that 'Human Adventure is Beginning' business from TMP is overstated too. I mean, this was a movie which dwelled heavily on Spock and which ended with a character merging with an artificial intelligence to start a new life-form. And that slogan hasn't really featured heavily in Trek since then.

If most people thought of a slogan for Trek, they'd opt for 'to boldly go where no man/ human has gone before', but DS9 was set on a space station (stationary) and Voyager was about a crew trying to get home.

And anyway, very often the human condition is best observed by an outsider - see Dr Who, for example.
 
Of course the main character and the majority of characters have to be human - that's blindingly obvious, except to hard-core fans.

Well, many would view Spock as the main character in the classic series.

Yeah, except that, you know, he wasn't. He was an exceptional character in a cast composed entirely of folks from Earth, in a series where the majority of screen time and the focus of action in almost every episode was William Shatner's character. Same is true of Data versus Picard, etc.

Arguing that this alien or that robot character is "popular" is not making the point that a series of this kind could be anchored by an "alien." Nor is making the argument that "a good story" can be built around an "alien" equivalent to arguing that such a character could carry a television series.

This is like that nonsense about a "Klingon series." It's for fan films only, and will remain so.
 
The "aliens" in Trek are generally best when they're playing off of humans. If TOS was just Spock in charge over-ruling all of the illogical humans with his superior intelligence, the show probably would have bombed. If TNG was just Data going, "ah," doing that head tilt thing, and reading the thesaurus to himself, it wouldn't have gone anywhere.

It's like the whacky neighbor on a sitcom: good to have, but there's a reason why he's the neighbor and not the star.

Plus, I've got to admit that a lot of the aliens just look goofy to people who haven't been watching them for decades. Sure, we can suspend our disbelief and forget that these folks emoting have horseshoe crabs on their heads or ass-cracks on their chins, but it raises a bit of a barrier to entry.
 
Of course the main character and the majority of characters have to be human - that's blindingly obvious, except to hard-core fans.

Well, many would view Spock as the main character in the classic series.

Yeah, except that, you know, he wasn't. He was an exceptional character in a cast composed entirely of folks from Earth, in a series where the majority of screen time and the focus of action in almost every episode was William Shatner's character. Same is true of Data versus Picard, etc.

And yet, Nimoy got more fan mail than Shatner and many of the most memorable episodes centre on Spock. Nimoy was able to secure a more favourable deal for TMP than Shatner.

TNG was an ensemble cast and everyone got their turn in the sun, even dull human characters like Riker and Crusher.

Arguing that this alien or that robot character is "popular" is not making the point that a series of this kind could be anchored by an "alien." Nor is making the argument that "a good story" can be built around an "alien" equivalent to arguing that such a character could carry a television series.

Modern Trek tv series feature ensemble casts. No-one character anchors it. And when is the captain the most important character? Dull Captain Archer versus T'pol? Hmmm. Whiny Janeway v Seven? let me think about that ...

Anyway, funny how Dr Who has managed to carry a series for 47 years, isn't it?

This is like that nonsense about a "Klingon series." It's for fan films only, and will remain so.

Who mentioned a Klingon series? Not me. Maybe we could stick to the question of whether or not the captain has to be human.
 
Anyway, funny how Dr Who has managed to carry a series for 47 years, isn't it?
Doctor Who is part human, looks human, almost entirely acts human, goes off on tangents about how important, special, and wonderful humanity is, and originally was human.

At the risk of countering my own OP, I think a better example for your case would be Mork. He still looked human, but sure as heck didn't act human, because Robin Williams doesn't act like a human. ;) But even so, that show was still about a human-looking guy who was exploring what it means to be human.
 
Doctor Who is part human, looks human, almost entirely acts human, goes off on tangents about how important, special, and wonderful humanity is, and originally was human.

Exactly so. The "aliens" on Doctor Who are critters like Daleks and Sontarians and such (those that aren't just human beings in funny costumes).

Maintaining that Spock was popular in no way addresses the fact that Kirk got the most screen time, the most dialogue and that most of the shows actually turned on his character. Nor does repeating the "TNG was an ensemble" line negate the fact that the same was true for Picard and that Stewart was able to renegotiate his contract and exert increasing control over the series based on everyone's understanding that he was the anchor of the show and by far the most popular character.

Fans can make as many of their own movies and stories where Captain X___ from planet Z____ is the star as they like, but the folks at Paramount are smarter than that - these things cost an awful lot of money, after all. The main character is the primary viewpoint character for the audience - most of whom are not trekkies, if the show's pulling an audience of any size - so yeah the Captain (or equivalent main character) has to be human.

P.S.

Let me get in here ahead of any other noodges and point out that the Doctor's part-human ancestry is considered to be of dubious canonicity despite the current producers' apparent acceptance of McGann's Doctor.
 
So you accept that a the captain could be alien, so long as there was a human character with equivalent standing or screentime in the series? I can compromise on that.
Well, I'm not Dennis - but that's kinda what I said in the frakkin' Original Post, if you'll go back and look! :p

The captain could be alien as long as the show's main protagonist was still a human - regardless of their actual position on the ship. And their screentime could even be about equal. (To use the wacky neighbor analogy from earlier, think of the TV show Perfect Strangers.) But a general audience is going to need that human character to cling to - at least long enough to warm up to the alien, if they are going to.
 
So you accept that a the captain could be alien, so long as there was a human character with equivalent standing or screentime in the series? I can compromise on that.
Well, I'm not Dennis - but that's kinda what I said in the frakkin' Original Post, if you'll go back and look! :p

The captain could be alien as long as the show's main protagonist was still a human - regardless of their actual position on the ship. And their screentime could even be about equal. (To use the wacky neighbor analogy from earlier, think of the TV show Perfect Strangers.) But a general audience is going to need that human character to cling to - at least long enough to warm up to the alien, if they are going to.

Well, what you said was:

...or, if not, the main protagonist and focus of most of the stories will have to be a below-decks sort of character, and they will have to be human. The majority of viewers will not care about the adventure of Star Trek if it isn't, at heart, about us.

Thoughts?

Not quite the same as what you're now saying. No talk of equal screen time there.

And perhaps you ought to have used a different frakking title! :p
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top