TOS: A Perspective

[Shaw]

What were your motives for posting here?

It is the TOS section (and this is where I generally post), you were woefully ill informed of the history of the medium of TV, but everyone deserves the possibilities of learning (even you).

...save for to say that I, personally, couldn't get past the visual aspect of it to enjoy the stories...

-and-​

It isn't a bias.

Not being able to get past something is a bias.

I'll just... trot on down to Best Buy and pick myself up their latest high def black and white television I guess. Silly me.

And there is the problem, if you want to learn what the show was intended for, you should run out and find an old black & white TV ($3 at a pawn shop). But I didn't believe you were ever serious to begin with... which was why I admitted that everything I told you was wasted on you (and you proved that assumption correct).

I invite you to reread what I posted when you are ready to take another (serious) look at TOS (or television of the 60's in general). You might realize that I gave you a lot of helpful history in that post. History that might one day help you work past your bias.




But obviously not today.

 

[AxelFoley]

I don't buy this "generation" excuse, it's pure bullshit. I recently turned 25, first watched TOS 3 years ago after being exposed to pretty much nothing from the same era and growing up with the "good" kind of effects. I still managed to love it from the get-go and never looked back.

I pity people who can't appreciate it because of the dated look & all that stuff, it amazes me that people can't get passed that and appreciate it despite those things.

See, this is my favorite part. I can understand why people like it. If I couldn't understand that and just declared my self a basher with no intent of ever giving it a proper shot it would be 100% unacceptable of me. However the idea that anyone out there who doesn't like it is a pitiable moron, the likes of which is undeserving of the mantle of 'Trekkie' is perfectly valid. It's like if you don't absolutely love it right from the start and accept everything about it then you're automatically a hater of it who is unable or unwilling to see the amazing aspects of it (even when you yourself make mention of those things.) I'm not sure what to term that but I know the feeling is very frustrating.

-Withers-​

Fascinating.
​

 

[Withers]

It is the TOS section (and this is where I generally post), you were woefully ill informed of the history of the medium of TV, but everyone deserves the possibilities of learning (even you).

This is kind of what I'm talking about; if you don't like TOS you're uninformed about something, can't appreciate something, are bias or just outright stupid. There's no valid opinion other than that it was amazing television (in the eyes of certain of people.)

Not being able to get past something is a bias.

Bias is a term used to describe a tendency or preference towards a particular perspective, ideology or result, when the tendency interferes with the ability to be impartial, unprejudiced, or objective



I guess I'm partial to things I know and am familiar with (those things having come from the 90's and on)... but that doesn't mean I hate everything else nor does that perspective interfear with my ability to see the amazing aspects of TOS. There's just one thing I'm not especially fond of and, for me, it's a big one- watching it. Education: good for more than just proving how mean you can be on a forum.

And there is the problem, if you want to learn what the show was intended for, you should run out and find an old black & white TV ($3 at a pawn shop). But I didn't believe you were ever serious to begin with... which was why I admitted that everything I told you was wasted on you (and you proved that assumption correct).

Translation: "You didn't end up agreeing with what I said therefore you're a waste of space."

I invite you to reread what I posted when you are ready to take another (serious) look at TOS (or television of the 60's in general). You might realize that I gave you a lot of helpful history in that post. History that might one day help you work past your bias.

I don't need permission. I made a list of things I'm going to get from Amazon (based on some of your suggestions). I plan to watch it in Black and White (one way or another.) I've all but taken everything you've said and said "I'm going to do it." So, forgive me, but what is it you want from me other than to sing the praises of a show it has been established I, personally, might be unable at this point to appreciate?


-Withers-​

 

[Shaw]

Like I said... obviously not today.


I suggest you take some time to lose the chip on your shoulder and come back to this in a couple days and reread what people have said and how you responded.

... and please, while you are out buying things, a dictionary would be a nice addition to that list (and stop using wiki).

You are showing signs that you are feeling persecuted, and that is a bad place to hold a conversation from. So I'll bow out of this.

 

[Withers]

Like I said... obviously not today.


I suggest you take some time to lose the chip on your shoulder and come back to this in a couple days and reread what people have said and how you responded.

... and please, while you are out buying things, a dictionary would be a nice addition to that list (and stop using wiki).

You are showing signs that you are feeling persecuted, and that is a bad place to hold a conversation from. So I'll bow out of this.

It's like when my grandfather patted me on my head, chuckled softly, looked down at me and said "You'll understand when you're older." I don't feel persecuted. I feel patronized.


-Withers-​

 

[plynch]

Nah...Nimoy is probably better than Quinto. Shatner is arguably better than Pine, but that's a matter of personal preference...Kelley/Urban are pretty much on par. Everyone else in Abrams's version are better than the original actors.

I would argue with Kelley/Urban equivalency, just because something I read once clued me into the fine acting that DeK does throughout the many hours of TOS.

I've never seen Urban in other stuff, so maybe he's good, too, but so far in Trek, he's sorta doing a DeK impression (as Quinto seems to be "doing" a Nimoy-as-Spock impression; which is not a bad thing, mind you). Pine seems his own man.

The thing that made the chemistry of the big TOS three was the acting creds of all three and their relationship, which involved stress and disagreement. Very missing in TNG (on purpose by GR), better in DS9 (Sisko-Kira) and VOY. NuTrek recaptured that fun pretty well, in that regard, I'd say. I'm still holding out for more ceerebral, but I think that Cage has sailed (in 1964)! Peace be with you.

 

[T'Bonz]

(And, again, my apologies to whomever it was that hates the centered posts. It isn't meant to piss you, specifically, off and eventually I'm sure I'll stop.)

Troll 101 win. Letting someone know they annoyed you. Never do that.

Dennis:

Nah...Nimoy is probably better than Quinto. Shatner is arguably better than Pine, but that's a matter of personal preference...Kelley/Urban are pretty much.

I think the difference is that today's TOS cast, like today, is played "edgier". With the original TOS crew, I felt like, even if they had differences or would tease each other, there was an underlying liking. With the new bunch, I feel like there is an underlying deadly serious competition. There is less (for me) of a comfort level in watching this group interact.

It may shake down by the next film, but while I might turn my back on Classic Kirk et al, I'd never make that mistake with the new crew. I might get a knife in it.

(I do like the new movie, actors, characters, etc. They just feel edgier and a bit more dangerous as a result. Although I must admit, of all of them, I don't really like new Kirk. He's a jagoff.)

 

[Maurice]

^^ It was never in b&w. Just turn your colour down to zero.

Examples:

Raw DVD capture (original color)

Color taken out (no chroma):

General desaturation:

Note that everything reads even in black and white, because the cinematographers understood the importance of values in addition to color saturation, hence the images work equally well in color and b&w (except the optical effect, which is not bright enough).
​

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I think the difference is that today's TOS cast, like today, is played "edgier". With the original TOS crew, I felt like, even if they had differences or would tease each other, there was an underlying liking. With the new bunch, I feel like there is an underlying deadly serious competition. There is less (for me) of a comfort level in watching this group interact.

It was important to have a comfort level of that kind with a group of characters who were regulars on a series at that time - the relationships had to remain stable and cooperative week after week, with virtually no change, hopefully for years. In a two hour script for an adventure movie it's more important that there be conflict, particularly during the introduction of the characters to one another (actually, that's not just true for adventure/action movies - romantic comedies work the same way ).

I just saw Gunfight At The OK Corral on television about two weeks ago - Kelley plays one of the Earp brothers and is just, you know, there delivering his lines. Now, you can't expect him to stand out next to Burt Lancaster and Kirk Douglas...but Earl Holliman brings more to his part in that movie, for chrissakes. Kelley may have been a good character actor, and Trek fans love him, but he was not a giant.

Note that everything reads even in black and white, because the cinematographers understood the importance of values in addition to color saturation, hence the images work equally well in color and b&w (except the optical effect, which is not bright enough).

Yeah, they were very concerned about that in those days, given the number of black-and-white tv sets in use at the time.

 

[A beaker full of death]

Earl Holliman brings more to his part in that movie, for chrissakes.

What's with the dissing Earl Holliman?? In an era of rugged men (of which he was certainly one) he always stood out. Distinctive voice and look; you can never mistake him for anyone else. Somehow never made it to leading man, though, unless you count Police Woman.

Note that everything reads even in black and white, because the cinematographers understood the importance of values in addition to color saturation, hence the images work equally well in color and b&w (except the optical effect, which is not bright enough).

Yeah, they were very concerned about that in those days, given the number of black-and-white tv sets in use at the time.

Proper cinematographers still are. Disparate colors aren't enough to make for an interesting scene or well-ordered composition.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Earl Holliman brings more to his part in that movie, for chrissakes.

What's with the dissing Earl Holliman?? In an era of rugged men (of which he was certainly one) he always stood out. Distinctive voice and look; you can never mistake him for anyone else. Somehow never made it to leading man, though, unless you count Police Woman.

He'll always be the Cook to me.

 

[A beaker full of death]

^ Sadly, Leslie Nielson will always be Frank Drebin to me.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Earl Holliman brings more to his part in that movie, for chrissakes.

What's with the dissing Earl Holliman?? In an era of rugged men (of which he was certainly one) he always stood out. Distinctive voice and look; you can never mistake him for anyone else. Somehow never made it to leading man, though, unless you count Police Woman.

He'll always be the Cook to me.

Yep. You can make a fetish of his supposed manliness, but you can't make a case based upon his career or his recorded performances that he's anything more than a mediocre actor. The "somehow never made it..." does not actually contain a "somehow" about which there is a mystery: he never made it because he wasn't very good.

 

[scotpens]

^ Sadly, Leslie Nielson will always be Frank Drebin to me.

I find it amusing that so many younger people are taken aback at seeing Leslie Nielsen in a serious role in Forbidden Planet. Nielsen spent the first half of his movie career doing dramatic and action-adventure roles, and only reinvented himself as a comedian with 1908's Airplane!

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Yeah, Nielsen was Commander Adams and the bad guy in westerns for decades to me before "Airplane!"

 

[Shazam!]

only reinvented himself as a comedian with 1908's Airplane!

Holy shit, I always knew he was old, but...