• 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!

An observation about main characters in the trek movies.

BlastHardcheese

Lieutenant Commander
Red Shirt
I wasn't alive to see TOS firsthand, nor the motion picture when it was first released. I watched all the old TOS reruns and the movies when I was old enough to be sucked in by the stories and characters.

One thing I felt about the movies with the TOS characters was that they became real people to me rather than caricatures. Perhaps it was the bad acting but when watching TOS, I always felt like the characters were all one dimensional, like they were going through the motions in a rather robotic fashion.

The TOS movies changed my whole perception. Kirk felt like a real captain with real hopes, dreams and regrets. His relationship with Spock and McCoy became genuine in my eyes, like three brothers who would live and die for each other if need be. The rest of the cast also felt like a real family with the crew rallying behind Kirk to save Spock or stumbling their way through the 20th century.

I felt the opposite about the TNG movies from Generations onwards. In the TNG series, we had amazing character episodes for each member of the main cast. From Worf struggling with his life as a Klingon and restoring his family's honour and raising his son, to Data exploring his own personal evolution, discovering who he was and where he came from and becoming the best human an android could hope to be. We even had specific episodes for the other characters to develop themselves, like Beverly fighting to get out of a collapsing fake universe, and the exploration of her character as a doctor when she was kidnapped by terrorists or when she saved Worf's life replacing his spine. Even Geordi had several episodes devoted to his own personal development, his relationships with women and his growth into a true miracle worker who even made Scotty proud.

I think almost all of this was lost in the transition from TV to the big screen. When Worf wasn't in the background doing his job or beating up the borg, he was getting headaches from Romulan ale for a cheap laugh. Geordi had one or two scenes doing what he does best in engineering but little else. I think like them, Beverly, Riker and Troi were also there because they had to be. At least we had Riker and Troi getting back together - something that should've happened by the 4th TNG season in my opinion.

The only two characters which were explored were Picard and Data. It felt to me like everyone else became window dressing because they had to be included as part of the TNG series cast. Some of them had their little moments but it felt like so much of the core of those characters had been lost.

It could be a testament to the lack of character driven plots in TOS that made the movies turn them into real people for me. I suppose after loving a series with so many good people in it who I got to know so well, a two hour movie about them couldn't do justice to it all.
 
Nice observations. I don't quite agree w/ what you wrote about the original crew (I felt they were richly developed during the series), but I think you expressed the problem w/ the TNG movies quite nicely. Others have written basically the same thing here, but you condensed the thoughts in an elegant fashion.

Doug
 
I thought Kirk spock and Bones were very well developed in TOS and were well used in the movies. The rest of the cast never got much to do in the show or movies though.

TNG made a better use of the ensamble cast while on tv but they made over 20 episodes a season so they had time to devote entire episodes to individual supporting characters. In a movie you have 90 minutes to two hours to tell a story so you're not going to waste time giving everyone a large important part. The show itself didn't do that, Each character may have had individual episodes featuring them but Picard and Data were in the end the two most popular and most featured characters on the show overall so it makes sense that they are featured in the films.
 
I rather agree with the OP. Indeed, TOS is more enjoyable having seen the films; and no TOS episode exceeds any TOS film. That's right, City on the Edge of Forever < The Final Frontier.
 
Well, TOS was basically a series about Kirk and Spock, and to a lesser though significant extent McCoy. The remaining castmembers were glorified window dressing, even if they all got their moments and even episodes where they play a key role.

TNG was an ensemble. Even if the stories gravitated towards popular characters like Picard, Data and Worf on the show, everyone in the cast got episodes about them and their problems, and also could play key roles in other person's shows (Geordi was a regular second in most Data episodes, for example).

TNG was also, well, a more character oriented show. TOS developed its characters through situations, but episodes chiefly about the character's problems - like "Amok Time" and "Journey to Babel" - were both rare and mostly confined to Spock. McCoy got only one episode in the whole series where he was the central interest, "For the World is Hollow And I Have Touched the Sky." TNG could have episodes like "Family", which don't even have any overt sci-fi plots in them, and are just pure character drama (or pure soap opera, depending on your perspective.)

But a movie's a movie, and the TNG writers decided to focus on their popular characters and give us big events in each film. The results didn't quite work out, but then, the TNG writers were all too frequently small-screen writers at heart ("Insurrection" is the sub-par TNG TV movie that never was.)

TOS was more adaptable to the format and unlike TNG, the writers and directors behind that franchise generally had a better idea of how to make things cinematic. Generally.

All-in-all... I'd say TNG has a clear advantage over its movie franchise, but the disparity for TOS is not as significant. TOS got make what worked on the small screen mostly work on the big screen, but point a hypothetical gun to my head and I definitely prefer the TV series.
 
But a movie's a movie, and the TNG writers decided to focus on their popular characters and give us big events in each film.

Not just the writers fault. Bear in mind Stewart and Spiner's contracts - ensuring they both have significant plot arcs in every movie - effectively ruined any chance that Riker and the rest were ever going to be anything more than making up numbers.
 
Not just the writers fault. Bear in mind Stewart and Spiner's contracts - ensuring they both have significant plot arcs in every movie - effectively ruined any chance that Riker and the rest were ever going to be anything more than making up numbers.

Is there any source to this?
 
Yeah, I'd not heard that Stewart and Spiner contractually had to have the biggest roles. I understand that as the two most important characters (as they're best known by the public), a threat by them to walk if not given a bigger part would be taken very seriously, but I've never heard of that written into their contracts.
 
Yeah, I'd not heard that Stewart and Spiner contractually had to have the biggest roles. I understand that as the two most important characters (as they're best known by the public), a threat by them to walk if not given a bigger part would be taken very seriously, but I've never heard of that written into their contracts.

That's a good, fine distinction: I doubt it was ever in their contracts, but they did have the power of 'not doing it' (once their existing contract ran out: ISTR that when the original TNG contracts were running out, the TNG cast were rebooked for up to two more seasons, and/or a film. Maybe someone knows more surely about this?).
Having said that, Stewart and (later) Spiner had credits as (associate, usually) producers from First Contact onward...
 
Having said that, Stewart and (later) Spiner had credits as (associate, usually) producers from First Contact onward...

That is a big difference. Maybe they had a contract that granted them to be executive producers, like Shatner's contract granted him to be director.

But that's still a huge difference to

Stewart and Spiner's contracts [were] ensuring they both have significant plot arcs in every movie
 
Not just the writers fault. Bear in mind Stewart and Spiner's contracts - ensuring they both have significant plot arcs in every movie - effectively ruined any chance that Riker and the rest were ever going to be anything more than making up numbers.
Is there any source to this?
Well, considering that Stewart and Spiner were the highest paid cast members in the film, it would make sense that the writers would focus on tuning the scripts to make them happy. Which is why Piller's "Stardust" script was gutted into Insurrection and why Spiner was influential on the script for Nemesis.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top