Star Trek is quaint

[martok2112]

Personally, I thoroughly enjoyed Man of Steel. Saw it on the big screen, and it was epic. I thought it made Superman II look like a guilty pleasure by comparison, and I loved Superman II. I liked Superman Returns well enough, but Man of Steel just blasted all that came before out of the sky..

The battles were simply epic and demonstrative of (in my very humble opinion) what a fight between two Kryptonians in and around a densely built city.

As for BvS, I think I'm just going to wait for it to hit blu-ray. I might go try to catch a matinee, and it certainly has my interest, (especially with Wonder Woman's first big screen appearance) but I'm more eager to catch Rogue One later this year.

That GoT graphic proves it's diverse! They have blondes, brunettes AND redheads!

Ha ha ha..... I like this guy!

 

[RAMA]

There's a different tone and a different way of filming today. Short seasons=more money per show, darker lighting. Fast pace, quick cuts, and generally darker stories, more violence. A new ST show might benefit from some of these things. ST has shown in can be interpreted for different times, a sign of a classic concept. A new show won't be like the Berman era.

Having said that, the Berman era, especially the directly inspired Roddenberry era STNG, were fairly unique shows. Most shows in the 90s were trying to be grungy, and pessimistic. STNG will never be replicated...it aspired to looking at stories from a positive side to make it's commentary, in almost all other cases shows have to posit a negative event or dystopia to make their points about the future. This is fine of course, but redundant. In this atmosphere, Trek in general winds up feeling pretty fresh to me. The key with a new show is to have some positivity in it even if it doesn't argue it's theme directly from a position of positiveness.

As for aging. The Berman era shows have aged better than TOS did in relation to shows that came 5-10 years after (Space:1999, BSG and Buck Rogers). Production and FX did in fact improve as time went on, ie: using real video screens instead of so many backlit cut-outs. But a remastered STNG bluray has a cinematic look preserved that only comes through with the new clarity.

RAMA

I think that the series have aged in different ways. TOS although very much a product of the 60s is still attention grabbing, it's actually quite a weird, experimental show for the most part and it works very well in that regard. There's a certain trepidation about space exploration which is conveyed through the surreal situations they encounter. TNG by contrast, I used to rank this as my favourite sci fi show of all time until I saw BSG, I still think it's very much up there but I'm starting to think TOS and DS9 were better shows. That being said apart from lower production standards (everything seems pastel and slightly cheap in places e.g. LCARS), DS9 and TNG are very mellow by today's standards and therein lies the rub: do you think that this slower pace allows for better storylines, deeper themes and character development? Or is it akin to reading a nineteenth-century novel, i.e. yeah sure there are big ideas and complex characters but it's all muted under this kind of awkward language and a plodding plot?

(For the record everything from this present decade isn't the end word on what constitutes good television, everything is 'dated' from the moment it's made and I don't believe in conforming to trends but I'm just interested in teasing out how these shows differ from modern ones because even when I was watching them 20 years ago, I sometimes thought, hm, this is kind of boring, yet rewarding at the same time).