Is it time to put Star Trek to rest?
- Thread starter Dar70
- Start date
I am beginning to think the franchise has nothing left to really offer. Well for me at least for me. Out of all the live action stuff over the last 7 or 8 years. Most of it has been pretty bland/bad to me. With maybe a season and a half of Disco, 1 season of SNW and 1 season of Picard. That I enjoyed to varying degrees.
Everything else I have not really enjoyed. Lower decks was just too inane for me. Only watched one ep of prodigy and they took it off streaming.
Lots of missteps imo the last 8 years. But it just seems like the franchise has run out of steam. I constantly find myself watching the older stuff or finding new scifi fantasy shows that offer something a bit different and unique. Or just plain watching more non scifi stuff now.
But after almost 50 years of some type of Trek in production almost every year (except maybe between Enterprise and the 2009 film) it's gotten pretty stale to me. There are almost 1000 episodes of Trek not to mention like 14 movies.
Many its just my age. Idk.....
But getting old doesn't explain why I love Star Wars Andor...
I think STAR TREK should have been put to rest after "Enterprise". Aside from Season One of "Discovery", I haven't been impressed by the franchise's productions.
Probably more appropriate for the controversial opinions thread but I tend to agree. It had some great characters and dynamic stories, but it had a tendency to overindulge with the Klingons and Cardassians.
Like TWOK, it's touted as perfection but flawed as any other Trek products.
I guess live theatre is not for you. That’s ok, it’s not for everyone.
Ah, I see. It’s not that you’re not fond of live theatre but that you also don’t appear to quite understand how it works. Simultaneous** productions of stage plays occur all the time and it is impossible for them not to have different actors in the same role. Are you suggesting there should never be such simultaneous productions? Are you further suggesting only one of them can be good? That seems both limiting as a view of stage productions and somewhat insulting of actors (note I am not at all suggesting that all simultaneous productions are equal in quality, but rather that multiple simultaneous productions can be of great quality with different actors playing the same roles).
We can certainly see all these productions AND we can certainly have preferences. But individual preferences do not objective truth make. Moreover, the appearance of a character vs the actor portraying the character is rarely as binding as you seem to think—performance is a more important criterion. Fictional characters are rarely reduced to their visual appearance/descriptions as the sole criterion.
“No one else can play this role” in acting is, frankly, an absurd notion if invoked as an objective rule. It may be one’s personal opinion owing to one’s admiration of a particular performance, but that’s hardly grounds for rejecting future performances by other actors.
**Simultaneous here means productions occurring within a span of time short enough for multiple productions and performances to have been seen by one person as opposed to a century or more gap as argued above.
I used to feel this way. I always figured recasting Kirk would be near impossible, just something about how Shatner translated the character made him uniquely his.
Then that fucker Chris Pine came on the scene and completely obliterated my worldview.
There’s no need for you to get involved. People are responding to what Lynx posts, which is kind of the point of the whole place.
And please, if someone is flaming or trolling, anyone here is free to hit the report button, and we’ll take a look.
Sometimes depending on where you where in your own life and how well they managed it, an actor will seem to own a part for eternity. Then something changes. Christopher Reeve was the definitive Superman for me, for instance, and I began to think no one else could handle the role to the way I thought of it as definitive. Then Cornenswet owned the role, too.
Of everyone I've seen play Kirk, obviously Shatner is the definitive, with, for me with Vic Mignogna close behind. But I like Wesley's take on the character.
Pine's Kirk is so different in some ways due to his origin and early upbringing that he's almost a totally different character. Nature vs Nurture. Kelvin Kirk had an abusive step-parent and ended up rebelling against the system till he joined the system to keep rebelling against it, vs Prime Kirk that had what appears to have been a better early life, apart from.. you know seeing half the colony he lived in mass-murdered on Tarsus IV, so leaving him more guarded and serious. Oh wait sorry. TOS wasn't dark!
Of everyone I've seen play Kirk, obviously Shatner is the definitive, with, for me with Vic Mignogna close behind. But I like Wesley's take on the character.
Pine's Kirk is so different in some ways due to his origin and early upbringing that he's almost a totally different character. Nature vs Nurture. Kelvin Kirk had an abusive step-parent and ended up rebelling against the system till he joined the system to keep rebelling against it, vs Prime Kirk that had what appears to have been a better early life, apart from.. you know seeing half the colony he lived in mass-murdered on Tarsus IV, so leaving him more guarded and serious. Oh wait sorry. TOS wasn't dark!
Good post. Except the praise for Wesley!
I think Wesley is doing fine.
Doesn’t blow me away, but I can totally buy him as Kirk.
Just on me. I see too much of Jim Carrey in him to take him seriously.
My only problem with him is that I watched way too much Vampire Diaries.
lol. I never watched it
I recommend a binge watch. It's actually pretty good. But it's really hard to see him as Kirk after watching it.
Perfection is a very high standard indeed! I'd be interested in which fan of Khan or DS9 claimed that their shows were perfect.
I think DS9 does the ensemble, female characters and alien civilizations better than TOS, TNG, ENT or DSC ever did
I do think they kinda overdid the Klingons who'd already been featured heavily in TOS and TNG
I understand. It's just that being an older actor makes it a bit hard to take him as someone who's still 'green'
Similar threads
