The best Saavik: Kirstie Alley vs. Robin Curtis

Is there a difference?

 

^ What I was thinking.

 

She's the only Trek actor I ever met, but that's not why I like her Saavik better than Alley's.

 

Alley by a mile.
Having said that, I saw Curtiss speak at a con, and she's a living doll.

 

To be honest, I can't choose. For me, Alley's Saavik is like a little sister; but Curtis's is a grown woman. I find Curtis physically incredibly attractive in the role.

However, I completely agree with the criticisms above with respect to Curtis's flat affect, presumably from the direction she received from Nimoy.

Spock himself was really quite emotional, and his character's party line that he was not was clearly bullshit. This makes Curtis's flat affect...puzzling.

 

Alley definately. Her take on the character was far more interesting. Curtis I found very unlikable.

 

Curtis's portrayal was markedly different from Alley's to the extent that they seem like different characters. Curtis chose, and the directors went with, portraying a very flat Vulcan sort rather than the near to the surface emotionalism that Alley did. It is like the next actor playing Bond starts playing him getting nervous whenever gun play comes in because it might be a more natural reaction or making him a concerned feminist in dealing with women rather than the macho alpha-male. Perhaps so, but it's not Bond. Curtis's work might have been better appreciated had the film makers just made the part a different character.

 

By all accounts, you have it backward. That is, it was the director, Leonard Nimoy, who chose to have Saavik be full Vulcan, and Curtis, new to Star Trek, who went along with it.

 

I can see that, but more or less, the character is portrayed differently to the point that it would have been better to have made them clearly separate characters.

 

Perhaps. But that wasn't what the script said, nor was it what the producers wanted.

 

Yes, I had noticed.

 

Kirstie Alley, of course!

Being more authentically "Vulcan" is no excuse for being dull, which, perhaps through no fault of her own, is the trap Curtis fell into . . . .

 

I know exactly what I meant.

Kim Cattrall played Valeris the way the other two should have played Saavik. (TUC was originally written with Saavik in place, but it was decided to not make her a villian. Insert Valeris.)

I've been at this Trekkie stuff for a long long time. :wink:

 

Vulcans are dull, that's the point.

 

I disagree. Done right, an actor like Nimoy or Mark Lenard can convey all sorts of stuff going on beneath that cool, logical exterior, which can be fascinating to watch. It's all about repressed emotion. That's the point.

Unfortunately, too many actors fall into the trap of playing Vulcans as bland, boring automatons--which just doesn't work theatrically.

 

I love the carpet padding on the wall.

 

I was just being cheeky. I was trying to make the same point Gov Kodos makes [POST=4978540]here[/POST] and [POST=4978598]here[/POST].

It is my opinion that they should have made Curtis a distinct character and given her a new name instead of making her nominally the same character but completely different in appearance and behavior.

It's well established in Trek lore that they are in fact the same character. I acknowledge that. I just don't like it.

 

I agree. Curtis should have been given a different name. Alley should have been brought back in "Undiscovered" as the traitorous Saavik instead of Valeris.

...And Ted Danson should have been brought in to do a cameo as bartender on board the enterprise with Norm, Cliff and Woody in full Starfleet uniforms. Carla would be redone completely in green.

Capt Kirk would enter the bar and everyone would yell "KIRK!!" followed by Woody asking "How's it going Captain?"

In which Kirk would reply, "it's a dog eat dog universe and I'm wearing MilkBone underwear."