New Appreciation for TAS

[Bry_Sinclair]

At the end of last week, I was flipping through Netflix looking for something to watch and stumbled on TAS. For a chuckle I put it on, having not seen it in years. I thought I'd seen all the episodes, but there were a number that were completely new to me which was a treat--new Star Trek to enjoy on Netflix!

Now whilst the animation is a little spotty in places, the voice work somewhat hammy, what they were able to do in 22-minute episodes is actually quite surprising watching them now as an adult. Some of the stories are really pretty damn good and makes me wonder what might've been had they gotten the chance of being made live action.

Anyone else had a rewatch of the series that fans forget and had their opinions of it changed?

 

[alensatemybuick1]

No

 

[marlboro]

I only watched it for the first time a few years ago. I liked it right off the bat. Very smart writing for a show aimed at kids.

 

[F. King Daniel]

While I admit TAS is mostly rubbish, with terrible voice acting and even worse animation, I love it dearly and always will. I love all the cool new stuff it added to the Trek universe.

 

[BillJ]

I love TAS.

 

[Forbin]

As I understand it, the voice acting is the way it is because the actors were never in the same room together at the same time. They recorded their parts separately, and didn't have the chance to act off each other.

 

[Christopher]

TAS deserves more recognition than it gets. It's the only Trek sequel series to have the involvement of most of the original cast and many of the original writers. It's the only Trek series that Roddenberry was ever given absolute creative control over, although he passed up that control and let D.C. Fontana take charge instead, then later hypocritically tried to discredit it because he didn't make it personally. It's the most direct and authentic continuation of TOS there is. (Keep in mind that the subtitle "The Animated Series" wasn't added until the DVD release. In original broadcast, it was just called Star Trek -- like a revival rather than a spinoff or sequel.)

As for the animation, it was fairly typical for the standards of Saturday morning television of the time, and actually better-looking than a lot of its contemporaries. Contrary to popular belief, TAS was a relatively high-budgeted show by '70s TV animation standards, although much of that went to the cast. The acting suffered because Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley lacked voice acting experience, but the other cast members did better. But the second season (the last 6 episodes) had significantly better acting and animation, since they had more time to polish their work.

 

[johnnybear]

My only beef with TAS is the Pirates of Orion where everyone in the episode calls it Orry-On instead of O-Ryan as it was known in various episodes of TOS and spoken by William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy countless times!
JB

 

[Christopher]

My only beef with TAS is the Pirates of Orion where everyone in the episode calls it Orry-On instead of O-Ryan as it was known in various episodes of TOS and spoken by William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy countless times!
JB

Well, it's not unprecedented in Trek. There's the Benecia Colony, which was "Ben-ah-see-ya" in one episode and "Be-nee-see-ya" in the other, though I forget which was which ("The Conscience of the King" and "Turnabout Intruder" were the episodes). And there were the constellation names they just pronounced wrong, like Ophiuchus in "Mudd's Women" (should be "oafy-ook-us," not "oh-fie-a-kuss").

 

[PureCrimson]

They've been showing this on local TV for awhile now. Now, for Trek, if I'm being honest, I was never much of a fan of the original series.

Not because it wasn't still the same kind of science fiction that makes me love Trek, but mostly because the general aesthetic always takes me out of it. I can't see anything but a cheap TV show, but I still have great appreciation for it in general.

For the animated series, I was curious upon finding out that it was meant to be a literal continuation of the original; just the latter half of the 5 year voyage, and not a dumbed down "give them a goofy monkey" kind of cartoon.

I've seen a few episodes from curiosity. The one with Spock in a time paradox as a child (saving himself under the guise of his older cousin) and the one with the cat alien things that were hot pink in color instead of gray.

They really... reminded me of the original series, so the fact they were animated really didn't change anything for me. If I was really into the original, I wouldn't have much of a problem with the animated series, I think.

 

[Maurice]

As I understand it, the voice acting is the way it is because the actors were never in the same room together at the same time. They recorded their parts separately, and didn't have the chance to act off each other.

Dorothy Fontana largely shot that down in a in a recent interview (link), saying the cast was together for the Filmation recordings more often than not.

 

[Terok Nor]

As I said in another thread it's TOS Season 4. Being a cartoon makes no difference to me. It's the same cast, the same ship, the same writers. It's Star Trek.

The only thing I'd change is the music. It was too bombastic and repetitive. The music in the live action series was much better.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I love TAS, but I recognize its many faults.

 

[Christopher]

For the animated series, I was curious upon finding out that it was meant to be a literal continuation of the original; just the latter half of the 5 year voyage, and not a dumbed down "give them a goofy monkey" kind of cartoon.

Yup. The reason Roddenberry went with Filmation to do the show is because they were the only ones who didn't want to make it a kids' show (although there had been an earlier attempt during TOS's run for Filmation to develop a companion show with teen leads being mentored by Kirk, Spock, etc.). TAS was actually promoted as the first Saturday morning animated series made for adults (although there had been adult-aimed prime time cartoons before, like The Flintstones and The Jetsons).

I've seen a few episodes from curiosity. The one with Spock in a time paradox as a child (saving himself under the guise of his older cousin)

"Yesteryear" by D.C. Fontana. Widely considered the best episode, and the one most often referenced in later Trek.

and the one with the cat alien things that were hot pink in color instead of gray.

"Slaver Weapon" by Larry Niven, adapting his Known Space novella "The Soft Weapon." A very odd story as adaptations go, because instead of adapting the novella to fit the Star Trek universe, it just plugs three Trek characters into a near-verbatim, if somewhat streamlined, dramatization of the novella, with most of its Known Space elements (Kzinti, Slavers, stasis boxes) intact. It's more like a backdoor pilot for a Known Space series than a Trek episode per se.

The only thing I'd change is the music. It was too bombastic and repetitive.

Oh, I loved it. The music that Ray Ellis and Norm Prescott (as Yvette Blais and Jeff Michael) wrote for Filmation's shows in the '70s was the soundtrack of my childhood. I didn't mind that it kept repeating, because that made it easier to memorize, and I loved hearing my favorite cues, like when you listen to your favorite song over and over. I admit, though, that someone who didn't literally grow up listening to that music might have less tolerance for it.

 

[BillJ]

I can't see anything but a cheap TV show...

One of the most expensive shows on at the time.

 

[Galileo7]

Before that arrival of TMP, in the '70s we had both the TOS reruns and the new TAS. Ever scene I was a young boy in the '70s, I have always appreciated TAS because it did actually continue TOS five year mission with the original cast and did not branch off into new characters on another ship.

 

[PureCrimson]

One of the most expensive shows on at the time.

Sure, but that doesn't mean it still doesn't just look like a TV set from the 60s.

 

[BillJ]

Sure, but that doesn't mean it still doesn't just look like a TV set from the 60s.

Which sets don't look like production sets of a TV series? Seriously? It is all TV. Throwing money at it doesn't make them any more "real".

 

[PureCrimson]

Which sets don't look like production sets of a TV series? Seriously? It is all TV. Throwing money at it doesn't make them any more "real".

You're getting a bit defensive. Just saying, it limits my own personal investment in it.

I don't have that problem with any of the films or Next Gen, since I believe the setting more.

 

[BillJ]

You're getting a bit defensive.

I'm just seriously tired of the "it looks cheap" jabs. Without those "cardboard" sets and Styrofoam rocks, none of the things you love about Trek would exist.