Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major characters?

[JarodRussell]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

You do know that NCIS has killed off main characters at least twice and had another one recently leave right?

What else are they gonna do when the actors leave? Same thing happened in Trek or Stargate every time the actor said bye bye.

So someone saying you don't like shows where characters leave or are written out while saying you like a show that does exactly that doesn't sound a little hypocritical?

That would be hypocritical, but I never said such a thing.

I don't like shows that kill of characters for the sake of it. But if an actor leaves, there is no other option left (three options that is: recasting, killing and leaving).

 

[The Wormhole]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

Yeah, killing a character because the actor wants to leave is quite a bit different from killing a character just because "it's unexpected and will create drama." Hell, Stargate Atlantis starting getting negative feedback when they started doing that.

 

[Kelthaz]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

That would be hypocritical, but I never said such a thing.

I don't like shows that kill of characters for the sake of it. But if an actor leaves, there is no other option left (three options that is: recasting, killing and leaving).

You're not the center of the universe, buddy. Hartzilla was replying to Lynx who did indeed say such a thing.

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

I don't like shows that kill of characters for the sake of it. But if an actor leaves, there is no other option left (three options that is: recasting, killing and leaving).

One of the advantages of killing off a character is that then the audience will wonder when you might do it again.

Main characters tend to be quite safe, I never felt that say Sisko or Janeway were ever in any real danger in any episode.

When NCIS put a bullet through the middle of Kate's forehead, it served notice that no one on the show was "safe."

 

[JarodRussell]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

When NCIS put a bullet through the middle of Kate's forehead, it served notice that no one on the show was "safe."

Erm, Sasha Alexander left the show, and that's why they killed her character off.

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

^ No, Sasha Alexander left the show because she couldn't stand the physical pace.

Her character of Kate Todd being shot and killed was a creative choice on the part of the executive producer Donald Bellisario. The character could have left NCIS service, been transferred, etc.

Killing the character made the show "edgy."

 

[JarodRussell]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

^ No, Sasha Alexander left the show because she couldn't stand the physical pace.

I only said she left the show, I never said anything about why she left the show.

Her character of Kate Todd being shot and killed was a creative choice on the part of the executive producer Donald Bellisario. The character could have left NCIS service, been transferred, etc.

Killing the character made the show "edgy."

As I said before:

But if an actor leaves, there is no other option left (three options that is: recasting, killing and leaving).

 

[Lynx]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

When NCIS put a bullet through the middle of Kate's forehead, it served notice that no one on the show was "safe."

Erm, Sasha Alexander left the show, and that's why they killed her character off.

That was the first and only time I actually thought of stop watching NCIS.

I mean, it was totally unnecessary. The actress wanted to leave and she and the producers actually told the world that in detailed press releases and articles, no BS about "mutually agreement" or "the writers couldn't write for the character" in this case. So I could accept her leaving.

But killing off Kate was rude and it did really p*** me off. For certain Star trek related reasons I had become a bit touchy when it came to killing off or dumping characters in a favorite series.

But after some thoughts I made the decision to keep watching it because I simply couldn't leave a show which had become my Number 1 favorite. So I stayed with Gibbs and the team and now I'm happy about it.

Still, I think that it was unnecessary to kill off Kate. They could have let her leave and maybe return in some episode later on.

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

Kate was in a few episodes after she was killed.

 

[Lynx]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

Kate was in a few episodes after she was killed.

Yes, but as some ghost. They could have spared us from that.

 

[The Overlord]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

I'm not talking about change. I'm talking about dramatic tension. Star Trek is a series where around 7 main characters fight aliens and encounter life or death situations on a weekly basis. If the characters are playing with god mode on it completely removes all the tension and drama from the show.

Why should I care if the Federation goes to war with the Dominion if I know every single character will be perfectly okay at the end of the day? Sure, it can still be entertaining, but there's no tension.

I don't require my television to be tense, I'm satisfied with being entertained. But ignoring that, there are other ways to make a show tense then killing main characters.

Besides, even the shows that do kill off main characters usually do so at the beginning or end of the season, mid season stories (for those shows that split the seasons) or some significant "event" episode. 90% of the time, you know everyone will make it out anyway.

Except House of Cards and Game of Thrones have managed to surprise people with certain character deaths, so clearly it is possible to surprise people with character deaths on a TV show, you just have to plan it well.

To me a character's death is like any other story line, it can be good or bad, depending on how its handled. I am talking about character deaths that planned almost from the beginning, rather then quickly killing a character off because the actor wants to get out of his or her contract. A planned death is better then a rushed death due to a contract dispute.

 

[Gretnablue]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

I have to disagree with killing off major characters. As many have mentioned already, killing characters just for the sake of killing characters is a very cheap way of building drama. But I also think there are other major problems when it comes two Star Trek.

The first is the, "Why should I care" situation. This happens when the audience feels that they can't invest in the characters because they know the writer can be lazy and kill them at any time. Comics in the mid-00s suffered from this a lot with high profiled comics like Ultimatum, Countdown and Cry for Justice being prime examples.

My Screen writing lecture told a good rule, if you can still think of story ideas for a character, don't kill him/her off. Otherwise you’re wasting potential and playing audiences for chums, something that can backfire on you very easily.

Secondly is in what Star Trek is in its very core compared to other series. Series like New BSG, Evangelion, Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead and Attack on Titan etc are all pessimistic in their core, and as such are better fitted for death because it flows better and more naturally. Star Trek, Red Dwarf, New Doctor Who, Trigun, Stargate SG1, Superman etc are all optimistic and are not as well made for death. Death isn't impossible, but it has to be well written and done far more sparingly. This isn't a bad thing, they are just different. You could be asking then can't we just make them more pessimistic, well, yes you can. But we have seen how badly this can be with Man of Steel, Stargate Universe, Torchwood (except season 3) being panned. Lastly, if you take the optimism out of Star Trek, is it still Star Trek or just another series in Star Trek colours?

Honestly I would like to see more optimistic shows on TV because I feel we have too many pessimistic series on at the moment so that for me personally, it is all beginning to look the same.

 

[BigJake]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

^ That screenwriting rule in your third para sounds like it would effectively rule out ever killing a character.

As for optimism, a genuinely optimistic show can exist in the same universe as the Grim Reaper. In fact character deaths can provide fodder for optimism and tying into and surmounting the universal experience of grief and loss. Shows from MASH to ER to Downton Abbey to (perhaps most famously) Buffy the Vampire Slayer all killed characters, none of them was particularly "pessimistic."

(For that matter The Next Generation made one of its best moves in killing Yar; yes they were forced into it given that Denise Crosby had decided to leave, but in killing her instead of just quietly having her rotate off the ship or something -- and doing it in a way that avoided trying to Make It Meaningful And Stuff -- they cleverly reinforced the stakes of the Enterprise's mission in a way that just offing random redshirts never did in the old series. Not that Yar was an especially popular or well-developed character at that point, but her departure accomplished a lot more than it might have done if handled differently.)

It's not something to be done too lightly or carelessly, but that's not the same thing as never doing it.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

I wish Paramount sold Star Trek to HBO and we get a Game of Thrones-like universe. I'd be cool with it being NuTrek or Prime.

CBS actually owns the TV rights not Paramount. And CBS owns Showtime, so this is actually something they could do.

CBS has no interest in producing /making a Star Trek show for CBS, The CW, or Showtime. And they're not going to sell Star Trek to HBO/Time Warner either, since it makes too much money as a merchandisable franchise to be let go.

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

^ That screenwriting rule in your third para sounds like it would effectively rule out ever killing a character.

As for optimism, a genuinely optimistic show can exist in the same universe as the Grim Reaper. In fact character deaths can provide fodder for optimism and tying into and surmounting the universal experience of grief and loss. Shows from MASH to ER to Downton Abbey to (perhaps most famously) Buffy the Vampire Slayer all killed characters, none of them was particularly "pessimistic."

(For that matter The Next Generation made one of its best moves in killing Yar; yes they were forced into it given that Denise Crosby had decided to leave, but in killing her instead of just quietly having her rotate off the ship or something -- and doing it in a way that avoided trying to Make It Meaningful And Stuff -- they cleverly reinforced the stakes of the Enterprise's mission in a way that just offing random redshirts never did in the old series. Not that Yar was an especially popular or well-developed character at that point, but her departure accomplished a lot more than it might have done if handled differently.)

It's not something to be done too lightly or carelessly, but that's not the same thing as never doing it.

The BUFFY episode where her mom dies of natural causes still stays with me. It's simply the best single episode of the series, even if you leave out the Act Four monsters.

I still say Yar's last will and testament was remarkably current and addressed to ''regulars only.''

There may be other shows that did the following, but OZ and THE SHIELD actually disposed of opening-credit actors in their very first episodes.

 

[MacLeod]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

Absolutely they should! I advocated in another thread Aaron Sorkin writing the new ST series. His biggest claim to fame being The West Wing, which never killed off a major character, but Mid-Major ones. And major character left the show to run for congress.

Everyone knows those characters that disappeared went to Mandyville.

 

[T'Girl]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

Jadzia's murder was the only way to handle the actresses departure from DS9. Given her marriage to Worf, excitement at the prospect of a baby and her position on the station, having her "go away' in any other fashion wouldn't have made sense.

 

[mos6507]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

CBS has no interest in producing /making a Star Trek show for CBS, The CW, or Showtime. And they're not going to sell Star Trek to HBO/Time Warner either, since it makes too much money as a merchandisable franchise to be let go.

And that's how it will be, until suddenly it isn't. Wait long enough, and things change.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

^That 'wait' will be a long, long, long, time. Moonves isn't going to be gone anytime soon as head of CBS Corporation, and most likely his replacement will (sadly) be just like him.

The only hope is for my idea to become reality, so that we can see new Star Trek in some fashion, even if it isn't a weekly TV show.

 

[MacLeod]

Re: Should a New Star Trek show be willing to kill off major character

So a long wait isn't a bad thing. And for a small glimmer of hope remember that aside from 1 TV movie DW was off the air for 16 years. ST's been off the air less then a decade and had 2 theatrical movies in that period.