Standing the test of time...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
People still like it a lot.
I Love Lucy continues to do well also.
I Love Lucy continues to do well also.
TOS was created, produced and portrayed by a group of relative unknowns who were hungry and willing to experiment and take risks. It wasn't just a factory production deal for them back then. They didn't just play it safe. They gave it their best shot, pioneering a story format that was then unproven on American television. By doing so, TOS not only stands out for making history, the risk-taking paid off because it produced so many great stories.
I personally also think TOS stands out compared to more recent "sci fi" shows because it did not succumb to subsequent trends, such as excessive profanity and graphic sex and violence. It's too easy for TV shows and movies today to rely on the shock value of provocative material as a crutch to keep the audience's interest despite lackluster writing.
One can also recognize that TOS, due to its very low budget and sparing use of FX, also tended to buck another trend in modern sci fi: excessive reliance on FX and other lavish production gimmicks. TOS instead relied on the viewer's imagination. A definite plus.
I personally also think TOS stands out compared to more recent "sci fi" shows because it did not succumb to subsequent trends, such as excessive profanity and graphic sex and violence. It's too easy for TV shows and movies today to rely on the shock value of provocative material as a crutch to keep the audience's interest despite lackluster writing.
One can also recognize that TOS, due to its very low budget and sparing use of FX, also tended to buck another trend in modern sci fi: excessive reliance on FX and other lavish production gimmicks. TOS instead relied on the viewer's imagination. A definite plus.
It's a simple question, but there are no simple answers. I think it's not just one thing, but rather a, dare I say, nexus of factors.
These factors probably include: Apollo 11, 60's counterculture, patriotic idealism, color television, first world luxury, Star Wars, not to mention the imaginative and talented artistic effort that went into the show's production, and that's me just getting started.
I think one should also consider the same question with respect to other similar active and long-running franchises such as James Bond and Star Wars.
These factors probably include: Apollo 11, 60's counterculture, patriotic idealism, color television, first world luxury, Star Wars, not to mention the imaginative and talented artistic effort that went into the show's production, and that's me just getting started.
I think one should also consider the same question with respect to other similar active and long-running franchises such as James Bond and Star Wars.
Two words: Pointed ears.
I don't know about James Bond. Did not get into James Bond at all until it got rebooted with a new Bond in 2006's Casino Royale (I know it's blasphemy but I like Craig. However I dislike QOS a lot, so hopefully the 23rd entry will be better ). Star Wars the Original Trilogy can stand the test of time. The new ones not so much. I wonder whether Star Trek XI will stand the test of time.
Probably the discussion in this thread has a bearing, as it indicates the cultural relevancy and significance of Star Trek.
Integrity. You can see the thought and care that went into the show from Mantrap onwards, even if they didn't always have the resources to make it perfect.
Vision. Gene's ideas probably were not as prevalent then, and while the show is ultimately entertainment, I think there was more there than just escapism involved in viewer perception. Having something(s) underlying it all resonates with viewers--even subconsciously--and it allows them to watch the show over and over again, and often gain something new.
RAMA
A large percentage of people have good memories of Lucy, a far lower percentage obsess over minutia. Lucy also didn't spawn over 700 hrs of programming, 11 movies and $3-4 billion in revenue.
All of above, and the lead actors in TOS are classically trained, have 100000000000 times more charisma than your average "modern-day" actors.
Honestly, I seriously doubt this, it wasn't even the ST franchise's best cast top to bottom!!
For a long time TOS stood head-and-shoulders above a lot of other television. That may not seem so apparent now because a lot of good shows have come and gone and there is so much more on television today. But for a good twenty years it wasn't hard to see how well the show stood up.
Many of the stories are damn good and remain quite relevant and accessible such that there isn't much you'd have to change to retell them today.
Many of the stories are damn good and remain quite relevant and accessible such that there isn't much you'd have to change to retell them today.
Last edited:
Does it? I can't say, because I don't really like it. I like the movies a lot better.
Hence I'd also say that TOS didn't fade away because it got constantly renewed, so to speak. With each new movie, and each spin off, TOS got another bump.
Last edited:
TOS did well in syndication for years. In some markets it's still playing. That staying power in syndication is a great part of what convinced TPTB to go for feature films. And each of the feature films were successful enough to justify making the next one. Sure the success of the feature films fed back onto keeping the series running in syndication, but I think that's all part of one thing rather than a separate influence.
And if TOS and then the films hadn't done well enough then there likely would have been no TNG.
Does TOS itself, without considering the rest of the franchise, really stand the test of time in any significant way that is better than any myriad of other shows from that era and earlier? I don't mean that as a slight of TOS. I love TOS. But I think our shared love of all things Trek, and the fact that TOS eventually spawned a bunch of other films and TV shows, may make it look like it's more prevalent today than it really is.
There are many other shows from the 50's and 60's that I see on television a lot more than I do TOS. And there are lots of shows from that era that people remember, talk about, buy DVD boxed sets of, and watch on Netflix. (At least until Netflix dies.) I'm not saying TOS has done badly. I just think perhaps it's not as unique as we might think it is. Unique, certainly, in what it spawned that came after it. But unique in its own continued presence and success? I'm not sure that it is.
There are many other shows from the 50's and 60's that I see on television a lot more than I do TOS. And there are lots of shows from that era that people remember, talk about, buy DVD boxed sets of, and watch on Netflix. (At least until Netflix dies.) I'm not saying TOS has done badly. I just think perhaps it's not as unique as we might think it is. Unique, certainly, in what it spawned that came after it. But unique in its own continued presence and success? I'm not sure that it is.
There are shows that are remembered, and some have been resurrected because of their availability on DVD and syndication on new cable specialty channels, but for years a lot of those shows were little but dim memories after their run...except for TOS and one or two others. I dislike ST09, but it was a consideration of TPTB that they felt the best thing was to go back to the era that most people (general audience) think of when they think of Trek.
Similar threads
- Poll
