I agree. The actress (Andrea Dromm) was in one of my favorite 1960s films -- The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming.
She played the nanny of Eva Marie Saint's and Carl Reiner's children in that movie.
Last edited:
New Talosians?
- Thread starter johnnybear
- Start date
I agree. The actress (Andrea Dromm) was in one of my favorite 1960s films -- The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming.
She played the nanny of Eva Marie Saint's and Carl Reiner's children in that movie.
Peyton Place was a soap opera that played up to 3 nights a week. Hardly the best that era could offer. It is comparable to something like Dynasty from the 80s.
Something like Gunsmoke or The Fugitive would be more apt.
Same here
They were obviously very disappointed by their own lack of distinguishing features, and were trying very hard to make up for it with their descendents.
I'm not saying it's a big deal because I'm not the OP who got triggered in the first place. All I said was if it ain't broke don't fix it and then a bunch of fans piled on to say the makeup from 1964 was "outdated" without being able to articulate what aspect of the makeup made it outdated other than the year it was done and maybe because it has practical effects for the veins rather than gimmicky (and fake-looking) CGI.
But I see this sentiment again and again, that new always means better, because new. When it comes to makeup effects we reached a point of diminishing returns on technolology around 50 years ago when Planet of the Apes came out. Beyond that you have to step into full performance capture ala the the NEW planet of the apes to do better. But there's nothing any more convincing about the way the makeup was done in the new Talosians vs. the ones from The Cage. Latex is latex.
The makeup is so similar that I don't buy the idea that audiences would have laughed at or rejected a 1:1 recreation anymore than they have trouble continuing to buy into the same exact Vulcan bowl cut and ear treatment as 50 years ago.
What's really going on is people are clutching at these arguments to justify any and all changes to the look and feel. The changes were not done to update. They were done to satsify the continuing self-indulgence of the creative staff who don't know when to leave things well enough alone. The changes to the Talosians are far milder than the Season 1 Klingons, but both come from that same attitude.
It's art. I don't mind change. If art is to remain static then it serves zero point. Where is all this anger towards TNG, TMP, TWOK or the like?
Thus far, the only consistent criticism is that past Trek could get away with changing, but DSC cannot. And I find that sad, for a show that endorses diversity at its core cannot endure diversity in artistic expression.
I thought the new Talosians looked ok
Who cares if they've evolved a ridge over time ?
We've had several Klingon incarnations, and ridges weren't standard on TOS Romulans were they ?
Can't beat a nice ridge
Who cares if they've evolved a ridge over time ?
We've had several Klingon incarnations, and ridges weren't standard on TOS Romulans were they ?
Can't beat a nice ridge
Not so.
And I don't think that's what all the criticism is about.
I know what you mean to say, but remember that change means change, not improvement. Change can be for the worse, and mos6507 may enjoy the earlier esthetic not because it's earlier but because he thinks it's better.
If so, I agree. The Talosians were interesting in the episode for story reasons, but I found their visual presentation uninspired. The nose ridge we've seen many times and looked cartoonishly done here. The heads looked more Vian than worked for me. The glowing veins were cheesy, and the fluid didn't seem to flow right. The outfits looked cumbersome and like concept art that could have used refinement. And as I mentioned upthread, they missed one of the main things that made Talosians so distinct – casting little old ladies to play the (probably) males.
Overall, I was left hoping they'd learn from this first time a thing or two to get better in a possible future episode, if we're ever that lucky.
Talosians can look like whatever they want. The ridge might be a new fashion craze!
And not just Klingons in general getting various ridge adjustments during BermanTrek, but even individual Klingons. Worf’s head shape and ridges changed since TNG season 1.
Could they have done the original Talosian makeup? Absolutey. Did they? Obviously not. Why? These are artistic choices. They decided to do something differently not to shit on 50 years of Star Trek history but to put their own spin on it.
I try not to let these things get to me because there are so many damned holes in Star Trek that I tried working through in the 1990s and early 2000s that I just decided to relax and enjoy the ride. It’s not the new is better that you suggest. If you want me to be completely honest, I actually prefer the TOS Talosians. It just doesn’t bother me there’s a change. To me, this is just a TV show. I enjoy it. I like spending a little time here on the forums chatting about it. However, for me, that’s about where this ends. I just am not bothered by these inconsistencies any longer.
Also - The idea of doing mo-cap for aliens is cool, but not exactly the most practical for TV effects. That process is expensive. And time consuming.
I'll clarify. Star Trek as art should change otherwise it serves zero point.
If they enjoy the earlier aesthetic more power to them. As I have mentioned elsewhere, Captain Pike is one of my favorite captains of the captains we have seen on screen. I personally enjoy the Cage uniforms, and general aesthetic of it as well, more than say TMP going forward. But, I do not labor other any idea that a contemporary audience is going to have the same appreciation of a prior aesthetic than this changed one.
I appreciate personal preferences but that does not render this change invalid. Furthermore, in my humble opinion, Star Trek is an appropriate place to explore such changes. It is supposed to be a show about looking to future, right?
Depends on an individual's interpretation, but one could also use 'somewhat active'.
Maybe, but mos6507 called out DIS by saying “You must be new to Discovery. Change for the sake of change is par for the course there.” However, change for the sake of change has happened with all Star Trek, so why is he singling out DIS?
TNG’s decision to change the look of Romulans made no sense to the Romulan’s established backstory. It was not a change in order to be “better”, but just a change for the sake of change.
People keep delivering this lecture, but have you noticed that STD looks silly and outdated? You have to be a hardcore skiffy fan to see form fitting twinkly spandex and walls of meaningless lights as futuristic, this late in the day - or as anything other than cliche kitsch, for that matter.
Last edited:
Precisely. I would appreciate it if someone could articulate to me why this random change is somehow more egregious.
Neither. Most of my studies around space clothing for active use (such as future colonies or stations) involve tighter materials. DSC certainly isn't breaking any new ground there, but it's hardly a bygone fad.
I don't mind the changes brought about by Discovery, but I do not feel that they were necessary. The idea that you can't tell new and excellent stories because you're trying to tell the stories through 'a look that is dated' is something that I don't agree with. It's not that people can't relate to other eras, etc, it's that they don'wanna. They want everything their way, with their look, etc. It is, ironically, a selfish herd. That 'Me-Generation' mentality. Art should never bow to the wishes of anyone other than the artist, for that matter. But, television is a commercial, money-oriented venture.
Romulans with ridges are part Reman.
I give you TMP.
