Data, the Doctor, T'Pol - any character who exists partly for other characters to sprout a homily to. In 2015, modern drama has largely moved past that sort of nonsense.
Does anyone really think 2017 will break the mold?
- Thread starter Frontier
- Start date
Data, the Doctor, T'Pol - any character who exists partly for other characters to sprout a homily to. In 2015, modern drama has largely moved past that sort of nonsense.
All of these "non-human wants to be/understand humans" stuff were originally an attempt to bring to later versions of Star Trek what Spock brought to the original. Fine, except:
- Spock didn't want to be human. He wanted not to be human;
- Spock didn't want to understand humans - despite his demurrals, he was pretty sure that he already understood humans and he wasn't terribly impressed.
I think that Trek has exhausted the Pinocchio theme. Really, we have already seen Data.
Then again what I'd want for a Star Trek series is a loose anthology series, so what do I know. Maybe breaking the mold could be a good thing too.
(I also want a Phantom/Ghost Who Walks anthology series).
Data and the Doc, maybe (years since I've seen VOY), but I don't think T'Pol was on any quest to become "a real boy" (or girl). She did "experiment" with emotions, but that was more in the mode of experimenting with drugs - just say no!
I'd say T'Pol, Odo and Spock do not really fit your theory. They all had to adjust to "normal" society, but none was on a quest to be recognised as human, or thought humanity was some ideal to be attained.
A proper Star Trek crew needs 'special' characters to create contrast and conflict. The entire show is based on exaggerated character traits.
Klingons = ultimate warriors, obsessed with honor
Romulans = always devious, plotting
Ferengi = always greedy, obsessed with money
Vulcans = no emotions whatsoever
Without these (silly) characters the show would lose its charm and would become boring real quick. It's space opera, not real life.
Klingons = ultimate warriors, obsessed with honor
Romulans = always devious, plotting
Ferengi = always greedy, obsessed with money
Vulcans = no emotions whatsoever
Without these (silly) characters the show would lose its charm and would become boring real quick. It's space opera, not real life.
I would love to see them do something fresh with Star Trek, it's such a big universe. It works on GoT, sense8, Heroes and a lot of other shows, so why not Star Trek. Don't just give us the story of the Enterprise or whatever, introduce us to a cast of characters from across the Federation, show us the Enterprise and DS9, show us characters who live on Earth, or on some far off planet. Strand a shuttlecraft full of people on the other side of the galaxy, and have them die there after 3 years. Go boldly.
On TNG, they couldn't promote Riker because it would take him off the show. Telling a broader story would free them up to give the characters a more realistic career. By the end of each episode of the previous shows, all the toys were pretty much back in their place on the shelf. I think that considering the way television has grown over the past few years, this Star Trek will have to be a broader canvas than just a static crew of characters do-gooding around the galaxy.
On TNG, they couldn't promote Riker because it would take him off the show. Telling a broader story would free them up to give the characters a more realistic career. By the end of each episode of the previous shows, all the toys were pretty much back in their place on the shelf. I think that considering the way television has grown over the past few years, this Star Trek will have to be a broader canvas than just a static crew of characters do-gooding around the galaxy.
I don't see them changing some basic formulas about the show, regarding crew etc. some things are just Trek. I would be surprised if we didn't see more interpersonal conflict between our main cast. This isn't Gene Roddenberry circa 1987 Trek anymore, and that can be a good and bad thing. I don't see then using any existing characters from any previous shows. I just hope they keep the show thoughtful, story/character driven, not distopian ala battlestar reboot.
I could care less if its in the JJ or Prime universe so long as it "feels" Trek. I would extremely disappointed if they just made some generic space show and slapped the Trek name on it. I would also think it would be a good idea to only have 10-12 episodes a season, lets face it more is not always better and often its filler if not outright garbage.
Like any revival striking a balance between new and old is extremely difficult. Every series has struggled to make themselves unique. I will be anxiously await what Mr Kurtzman decides to do with Trek. I admit some excitement but also some trepidation. We all know the strengths and weaknesses of the current movies. I am optimistic that we will be more interesting stories (trek is always better on TV) but I just hope they will be good enough.
I could care less if its in the JJ or Prime universe so long as it "feels" Trek. I would extremely disappointed if they just made some generic space show and slapped the Trek name on it. I would also think it would be a good idea to only have 10-12 episodes a season, lets face it more is not always better and often its filler if not outright garbage.
Like any revival striking a balance between new and old is extremely difficult. Every series has struggled to make themselves unique. I will be anxiously await what Mr Kurtzman decides to do with Trek. I admit some excitement but also some trepidation. We all know the strengths and weaknesses of the current movies. I am optimistic that we will be more interesting stories (trek is always better on TV) but I just hope they will be good enough.
There is a possibility that the 2017 new TV show may use some old ideas such as the 1970s aborted Trek TV reboot Star Trek: Phase II (synopses of the original story treatments for the other commissioned stories.)or Philip Kaufman's aborted film Star Trek: Planet of the Titans (alternatively called Star Trek: Planet of Titans) was to have been the first motion picture based on TOS material or designs from it.
The issue is Paramount Pictures owns the development not CBS but technically it is still licensed from CBS if it goes into production. The link to PhaseII above has synopses of of all the story treatments.
Does anyone think any of this will be used at all?
The issue is Paramount Pictures owns the development not CBS but technically it is still licensed from CBS if it goes into production. The link to PhaseII above has synopses of of all the story treatments.
Does anyone think any of this will be used at all?
Last edited:
Most Vulcan episodes are about their conflict with emotions.
e.g.?
In TOS Spock frequently said or implied that he was not subject to emotions.
A lie?
An exaggeration.
A whopper.
e.g.?
In TOS Spock frequently said or implied that he was not subject to emotions.
A lie?
An exaggeration.
^This.
It's well established that Vulcans are a seething mess of emotion which they chose to supress due to the near destruction of their planet and subsequent teachings of Surak. Spock, being conflicted between his Human and Vulcan side chose to be "more Vulcan than a Vulcan" claiming he had NO emotion at all. It is only through the evolution of his character and acceptance of his heritage during the movies that he finally comes to terms with his emotional side.
It is interesting that we had main characters who tried to be "more culturally stereotypical than others of their species". We had Spock as above and Worf was always more Klingon than a Klingon. I'm glad that latter series moved away from this cultural stereotyping, Quark, Tuvok, T'Pol were all much more layered. And I say that as someone who prefers TOS and TNG.
