Are the changes to TOS lore here to stay?

[Nerys Myk]

Just as long as Starbuck stays a woman . . . .

Another flubbed re-do, if you ask me.

Gotta disagree. The new BSG was vast improvement on the original.

The first version isn't always the best . . ..

Up is about the only direction you could go with BSG.

 

[Christopher]

My feeling is that, while the revived BSG was certainly a lot smarter and better-written, the original was generally more fun and watchable. I wish modern TV writers would get out of the habit of believing that only dark, cynical, depressing, violent stories can be intelligent.

 

[Malaika]

...Are you complaining that Uhura also was Kirk's friend in Star trek into darkness?...

"There’s a difference between a female character who exists in a story and has a romantic relationship with a male character versus a female character who exists in a story to have a romantic relationship with a male character"
​

and Uhura is the first, not the second.

Good point. Uhura in the new movies isn't defined purely by her romance with Spock; that's just the part that stands out most in observers' minds and overshadows the rest. She's also been redefined in a gadfly/conscience role for Kirk, much like the role McCoy played originally. She's the one person who isn't impressed by his charm and cockiness and is thus able to keep him honest, to anchor him in reality. Although I'll grant that STID didn't do as much with that side of her role as ST'09 did (oh, how I wish that film had a proper subtitle).

Very good point Christopher. And one I'm glad you brought up, as it may dovetail into a prediction I'll make; McCoy's role will continue to diminish in future incarnations of ST.

It's the changing context. In the old thing, it's undeniable to me that the sexism and the biases of that era was the main reason why the 3 most prominent characters were all males. Trying to apply the same scheme nowadays might be problematic and anachronistic.
In that, the Kirk-Uhura-Spock thing kind of mirrors the working Harry-Ron-Hermione formula. The dynamic is able to provide both a romantic relationship AND a platonic friendship between one of the male characters and the female one. You kill more than two birds with one stone.

This is not to say, though, that it must be either Uhura or McCoy. I think, so far, they both kind of have the same roles and prominence in terms of being the two characters that are the most close to the two male protagonists.
I still see Spock/Uhura and Kirk/Bones kind of parallel each other a bit in terms of scenes. Like at the beginning of stid you see Bones 'helping' Kirk to distract the natives while in the shuttle you see Uhura helping Spock get into his volcano suit.
Also, while you do have a Kirk-Uhura-Spock dynamic in the away mission on kronos, you also have scenes on the bridge with a Kirk-McCoy-Spock dynamic.

They just need to give some interactions to Uhura and McCoy too and you have a quadrumvirate.
They already sort of have their quadrumvirate moment in the end when it's essentially McCoy, Uhura and Spock that saved Kirk. I love when McCoy reminded Kirk that him and Uhura had something to do with that too and he shouldn't thank only Spock
Uhura and McCoy also were the two officers that helped Spock trick Khan with the torpedoes (I must be the only one that remembered that scene where he instructed them and thus why Uhura was in sickbay at one point when Kirk and Scotty brought an injured Carol there and she was the first to help her walk with a nurse)

 

[Greg Cox]

Uhura mentions having had an Orion roommate in The Rings of Time...

Hah! I don't even remember writing that.

 

[albion432]

I agree with the viewpoint of your last post Malaika, I like how you tie the change of importance between Uhura and McCoy as a sign of the times. That seems to be why these changes occur over time, in order to keep the character interactions and situation current.

I have another analogy and prediction that is completely separate from your post, but will post it here to tie into the whole Uhura McCoy interaction you suggested.

They just need to give some interactions to Uhura and McCoy too . . .

Here's my next prediction, that Uhura and McCoy will hook up in the next incarnation of ST. Here's the reasoning behind my theory:

Ok, take Goldilocks and the three bears:

Kirk= Papa Bear
Spock= Mama Bear
McCoy= Baby Bear

Uhura= Goldilocks (or rather, the antithesis of Goldilocks)

First Goldilocks gets into Papa Bear's bed, but it's too hard and she doesn't like it. In the original series Uhura and Kirk have a kissing scene in Plato's Stepchildren (the fact they were forced into it doesn't matter in this analogy). Obviously Uhura must have though Kirk was "too hard" and didn't like it, since nothing more came of it. (I've read a pretty good case for Kirk and Uhura having something going on the side in the original series, which can be inferred by his preferential treatment of her on the bridge, but that's another story.)

Next Goldilocks gets into Mama Bear's bed, but it's too soft and she doesn't like it either. In the reboot Uhura has several kissing scenes with Spock, but my guess is eventually she's going to decide this rebooted Spock is too soft and she won't like it, and she will eventually dump him. Or maybe she won't dump him in this reboot, and maybe they will begin the next reboot together but she will get bored with having to wait seven year to have sex with him and will dump him for being "too soft" for too long of a period, which leaves the door wide open for McCoy to step in.

Finally Goldilocks gets into Baby Bear's bed, and it's just right! Based on this motif, I'm going to predict in the next reboot Uhura is going to have even more kissing scenes with McCoy, and she is going to like it and stay with him.

To further my theory, remember what Dax said of McCoy, he's definitely got surgeon's hands.

Maybe through some weird transporter accident two of them will eventually be merged into one character, like Tuvix in Voyager. You know how much McCoy always hated the transporter, and maybe for good reason after all. Any thoughts on this?

 

[Hartzilla2007]

My feeling is that, while the revived BSG was certainly a lot smarter and better-written, the original was generally more fun and watchable. I wish modern TV writers would get out of the habit of believing that only dark, cynical, depressing, violent stories can be intelligent.

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

 

[BillJ]

My feeling is that, while the revived BSG was certainly a lot smarter and better-written, the original was generally more fun and watchable. I wish modern TV writers would get out of the habit of believing that only dark, cynical, depressing, violent stories can be intelligent.

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Yes. I quite watching the new version because there wasn't a likable character in the bunch and it was just depressing. I can get that from the real world anytime I want.

 

[SiddFinch1]

My feeling is that, while the revived BSG was certainly a lot smarter and better-written, the original was generally more fun and watchable. I wish modern TV writers would get out of the habit of believing that only dark, cynical, depressing, violent stories can be intelligent.

Exactly...I heard there may be another reboot movie trying to blend aspects ot the 70's and recent Ron Moore version...could be interesting

 

[Christopher]

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Yes, thank you, I've only heard that argument about a million times. But there's room for optimism and humor even in the darkest times. That's part of what humor is for, a defense mechanism against despair. There were episodes of the revived BSG, mainly those written by Ron Moore himself or by Jane Espenson, that did find a good balance of darkness and humor. But most of the other writers couldn't find that balance and erred on the side of unrelenting angst and brutality.

 

[albion432]

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Yes, thank you, I've only heard that argument about a million times. But there's room for optimism and humor even in the darkest times. That's part of what humor is for, a defense mechanism against despair. There were episodes of the revived BSG, mainly those written by Ron Moore himself or by Jane Espenson, that did find a good balance of darkness and humor. But most of the other writers couldn't find that balance and erred on the side of unrelenting angst and brutality.

One of the biggest differences in tone between the two versions of BSG lay in the fact one was pre9/11 and the other was post9/11.

The lack of quality in the original series had a lot to do with the network insisting that Larson change his format from a series of made for tv movies produced at the rate of one every six months, to a full blown series starting at the beginning of the next season. Larson's original plan to produce a series of movies is why BSG has so many two-parter's.

 

[Greg Cox]

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Yes, thank you, I've only heard that argument about a million times. But there's room for optimism and humor even in the darkest times. That's part of what humor is for, a defense mechanism against despair. There were episodes of the revived BSG, mainly those written by Ron Moore himself or by Jane Espenson, that did find a good balance of darkness and humor. But most of the other writers couldn't find that balance and erred on the side of unrelenting angst and brutality.

I agree that BSG levels of grimness should not be the default, but I thought it worked for that particular series and those particular characters. Some shows and movies are just going to be more dark and brutal than others. All depends on what fits the material--and what the viewer is in the mood for.

Sometimes you want to watch Hannibal; sometimes you want to watch Warehouse 13. Grim and angsty is one color in the crayon box; it shouldn't be overused, but it shouldn't be shunned or scorned either.

 

[Christopher]

Sometimes you want to watch Hannibal; sometimes you want to watch Warehouse 13. Grim is one color in the crayon box; it shouldn't be overused, but it shouldn't be shunned either.

That's a good way of looking at it. Really, trying to rank the two Galacticas against each other is kind of missing the point, because they weren't in any way trying to be the same kind of show. They're as different as the Adam West Batman is from the Christian Bale Batman, or as a Disney fairy tale movie is from Sondheim's Into the Woods. They're interpreting the same basic premise in very different styles and with very different goals.

 

[Greg Cox]

Sometimes you want to watch Hannibal; sometimes you want to watch Warehouse 13. Grim is one color in the crayon box; it shouldn't be overused, but it shouldn't be shunned either.

That's a good way of looking at it. Really, trying to rank the two Galacticas against each other is kind of missing the point, because they weren't in any way trying to be the same kind of show. They're as different as the Adam West Batman is from the Christian Bale Batman, or as a Disney fairy tale movie is from Sondheim's Into the Woods. They're interpreting the same basic premise in very different styles and with very different goals.

Those aren't bad comparisons. And while I never liked the old BSG, I can certainly see how the new version might come as a shock to fans of the original.

Me, I actually preferred Buck Rogers back in those days. It was a goofy, pulpy space opera that knew it was a goofy, pulp space opera and had no pretensions. Unlike original-recipe BSG which struck me as a dopey kid's show with delusions of grandeur . . . .

Then again, I was an oh-so-sophisticated college student when the old BSG debuted, so it was perhaps all too easy to dismiss it as juvenile compared to the classic shows I'd grown up on: TOS, The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, etc.

No doubt I would have have loved it when I was twelve . . . and took myself less seriously.

 

[Christopher]

Then again, I was an oh-so-sophisticated college student when the old BSG debuted, so it was perhaps all too easy to dismiss it as juvenile compared to the classic shows I'd grown up on: TOS, The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, etc.

Well, it was. It's certainly not on the same level as those shows. It was silly, but it was at least entertaining -- at its best, anyway.

 

[Enterprise1701]

I just hope that the next reboot is a 100% reboot that just starts by saying; "IN A COMPLETELY ALTERNATE UNIVERSE TO PRE-ESTABLISHED CANON..."

You mean like Battlestar Galactica?

Edit: Oops, I didn't realize that everyone else had thought of Battlestar Galactica as well by page 12 of this thread.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I just hope that the next reboot is a 100% reboot that just starts by saying; "IN A COMPLETELY ALTERNATE UNIVERSE TO PRE-ESTABLISHED CANON..."

Nah, you don't want the audience thinking "WTF does that mean?"

 

[Dukhat]

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Other than the killer robots, you've just described that fun show Star Trek: Voyager.

 

[Greg Cox]

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Other than the killer robots, you've just described that fun show Star Trek: Voyager.

Honestly, Voyager could have used a bit more darkness and intensity . . ..

 

[Robert Comsol]

...which I think "Year of Hell" delivered adequately.

Bob

 

[CrazyMatt]

Um, should a show about what's left of humanity on the run from the unrelenting killer robots that killed the rest of humanity in ships that likely weren't built. for long voyages in deep space with no allies, little supplies, and few chances to resuply, and their civiliation barely existing really be a fun show?

Other than the killer robots, you've just described that fun show Star Trek: Voyager.

Honestly, Voyager could have used a bit more darkness and intensity . . ..

To me:

TOS = Thought provoking entertainment
TNG = Thought provoking entertainment
DS9 = Thought provoking entertainment
Voyager = Boring