TOS- Overrated?
- Thread starter AdmiralScreed
- Start date
There was a lot of suspense towards the beginning when the threat was introduced, but it went on for so long and was so drawn out that it got to the point that I just didn't care too much anymore. There was so much unnecessary material that could have been cut to improve the flow and pacing, but since they had to fill 50 minutes and they couldn't think of anything better to do with it, we ended up getting a REALLY slow paced dud. The camera just jumps back and forth between the crew and the viewscreen for most of the episode.
I would have no problem with TCM if there had been a slow and gradual build-up leading to a grand climax. But, instead the episode started out with lots of energy and just gradually petered out until the end, where it concluded with a really anti-climactic and awkward ending. Just my opinion.
I'm curious, what petered out for you as there was a countdown to destruction almost entirely during the second half? Yea, Kirk ordering a salad for his weight and talking about a little suffering being good for the soul was a little misplaced but how would real astronauts act? They might be a little detached too in that situation.
I'm not sure exactly what I would've done differently to improve the pacing, other than remove a lot of the unnecessary scenes that made the pacing really sluggish. It's been several months since I've watched this episode, so I might go back and rewatch it at some point just to see if my opinion changes. You seem to like it quite a bit, as do a lot of other fans, so upon a second viewing maybe I will come to like it more. I'll try to rewatch it sometime soon, and afterwards I'll start a thread in the TOS section with my thoughts on it. Nice chatting with you about TOS and The Corbomite Maneuver. You've given me some food for thought, so hopefully we can revisit this topic after I've had some time to rewatch the episode and mull over it some more. Thanks for chatting.
This is Admiral Screed signing off.
Two things:.
One:
Cultural "wow factor" evolves over time. Remember when 32-bit color and a 1024x768 resolution were new and awesome? And now they don't impress at all. But in their day, they were da bomb!
Two:
Star Trek should be judged in the context of its time. So I recommend that the OP head over to hulu or youtube and watch some eps of Lost in Space, Time Tunnel, and Land of the Giants for comparisons on stories, production values, etc. Might give some insight into why Star Trek seemed so special to us way back then.
One:
Cultural "wow factor" evolves over time. Remember when 32-bit color and a 1024x768 resolution were new and awesome? And now they don't impress at all. But in their day, they were da bomb!
Two:
Star Trek should be judged in the context of its time. So I recommend that the OP head over to hulu or youtube and watch some eps of Lost in Space, Time Tunnel, and Land of the Giants for comparisons on stories, production values, etc. Might give some insight into why Star Trek seemed so special to us way back then.
I just want to say one more thing. Sometimes, some things are an acquired taste, like even Mozart for instance. There are some pieces that I think are crap when I first hear them but become favorites over time. The ability and capacity to appreciate is not always easy especially when those things turn out to be a disappointment. Do you like hors derves. Did I spell that right? Or did a mod just spill his coffee?
Doctor Who? I used to think that I was being too harsh on TOS given when it was made, but the B&W era of Doctor Who holds up amazingly well to this day. TOS doesn't deserve any special leeway for its age when England was doing a much better job on a fraction of TOS' budget at the same time.
The production values are crap, yes, but that has nothing to do with the episode quality.
It has quite a bit to do with it, actually, but let's not get caught up on that point. Are you actually suggesting that DW had superior writing or acting during the B&W era? How much of it have you actually seen?
I mean, it might be an arguable point if you're comparing a Troughton serial to a weaker Trek outing, but you can't hold anything from the Hartnell era up against any halfway decent Star Trek episode without feeling embarrassed for the DW guys.
YARN
Fleet Captain
Watch some "made it in my garage" fan Trek you'll see what bad acting is. On the other hand, you'll also see (in some cases) SFX that totally outclass what they could do in the 60's. Fan Trek, if anything, highlights how much there is to classic than kewl space stuff.
The people who made TOS knew what they were doing. The editing is crisp and the dialogue is efficient. The camerawork compliments the action. The camera in the right place showing us exactly what we need to see. This wasn't just competent TV, but slick and efficient story telling.
And the stories are stories for their time. They were about as subversive as you could get in the 1960s. For where America was at that time, TOS did what it was supposed to do (morality tales for that time).
Shatner's Kirk, for his time, fit the leading man type very well. Compared to the "men of action" of his time, he was very much a Picard.
The people who made TOS knew what they were doing. The editing is crisp and the dialogue is efficient. The camerawork compliments the action. The camera in the right place showing us exactly what we need to see. This wasn't just competent TV, but slick and efficient story telling.
And the stories are stories for their time. They were about as subversive as you could get in the 1960s. For where America was at that time, TOS did what it was supposed to do (morality tales for that time).
Shatner's Kirk, for his time, fit the leading man type very well. Compared to the "men of action" of his time, he was very much a Picard.
I've seen all of the complete serials from Hartnell and Troughton's era. I've also seen virtually every TOS episode, although it has been some years for a few of them. I think the acting is comparable between the two shows (mostly mediocre with a few moments of greatness) and the writing is superior on Doctor Who.
Oh, I'm always embarrassed for the Doctor Who production team, but the stories do hold up. I'll take "The Aztecs" over anything TOS has to offer.
There was a time in the mid-80's where I was desperate to watch sci-fi and our local PBS ran Doctor Who. I stuck it out for a year, but it was bad, so very bad. The acting, the sets and the special effects were atrocious. The story quality varied wildly.
It was a pretty bad experience and to this day I can't watch Doctor Who, even though time travel is one of my favorite elements of sci-fi.
Perhaps if they had a Matt Jefferies or a Bob Justman they could've made something palatable.
Similar threads
