What TOS-era character could have captained the Enterprise-B?

[Allyn Gibson]

Two characters that just came to mind that weren't on TOS but are "TOS-era" are Erika Ortegas and Jenna Mitchell. However, Ortegas (b. 2233) would be 60 years old when the B launched, so those two would probably be admirals if still active (or alive).

EDIT: Just checked and Kirk was also born 2233, so... never mind.

This post makes me think of Peter David's novel, The Rift, which features a Commodore Jose Tyler in the movie-era.

I hope we do get to see in the years and decades to come in future productions where Pike's crew ends up.

 

[comsol]

DeSalle - he was placed in command during Catspaw.

 

[Denise]

I also have agree with those of you above who felt that the send-off in TUC was a fitting ending for Kirk and that his ultimate fate did not need to be seen on screen. It boggles my mind a bit too why writers would want to kill off their heroes, but that's just my take. I liked S3 of Picard, for the very reason that it provided an excellent ending to the characters.

Same with Spock's demise. I would have been cool with him disappearing and never being seen again. It keeps the door open for many possibilities. Or even just take for granted he lived out his life on New Vulcan.

 

[Procutus]

Agreed. I realize that was done as a bit of a tribute to Leonard after he passed, but by the same token, just because he was no longer with us, it was not necessary for Spock to die (a second time) as well.

 

[Riley]

I vote Saavik as well. Sulu could do it, but 2 Sulus may be too much.

I wouldn't mind losing Demora, though I think it would be more fair to Koenig that Chekov gets the job.

I know there are very mixed feelings about Terry Matalas here, but I strongly agree with what he said about the making of season 3 of Picard. When he was asked about the characters all surviving and having a happy ending, he said he doesn't understand why writers want to kill off their heroes. He said he just couldn't bring himself to kill off any of the TNG characters. I'm on board with that. It might not be the "modern" approach, but I like happy endings. Kirk didn't need an on screen death, IMHO. His farewell in TUC was just fine.

Characters like James T. Kirk should never be shown meeting a definitive end, IMO. They're modern myth and as such, they should ride off into the sunset. This is what should have become of the entire TOS crew. The only TOS character who wasn't in some way diminished by their appearance in the TNG era was McCoy. Sarek lost his mind, Spock was dramatically underused in a not very interesting premise, Scotty was trapped in a transporter purgatory for decades, and Kirk was also trapped in another kind of purgatory for decades, only to be freed and then die. The TOS characters deserved better and these days, I tend to just ignore their appearances in the TNG era except for McCoy's inspection in "Encounter At Farpoint."

Logically, should be Chekov. He was a first officer in TWOK so it always seemed strange that he went back down to somewhat menial postings afterwards.

Agreed, especially since he was an XO and Sulu was getting command of the Excelsior before the Genesis incident. Dialogue removed from Star Trek II establishes that Sulu was aboard the Enterprise as a favor to Kirk before taking command of Excelsior.

 

[CoveTom]

Characters like James T. Kirk should never be shown meeting a definitive end, IMO. They're modern myth and as such, they should ride off into the sunset. This is what should have become of the entire TOS crew. The only TOS character who wasn't in some way diminished by their appearance in the TNG era was McCoy. Sarek lost his mind, Spock was dramatically underused in a not very interesting premise, Scotty was trapped in a transporter purgatory for decades, and Kirk was also trapped in another kind of purgatory for decades, only to be freed and then die. The TOS characters deserved better and these days, I tend to just ignore their appearances in the TNG era except for McCoy's inspection in "Encounter At Farpoint."

Agree on all counts. Especially Scotty. For as big a fan of TOS as Ronald D. Moore claims to be, man did he get the character of Scotty wrong.

And McCoy's appearance was a textbook example of how to do a poignant, meaningful, substantive cameo. It was just perfect.

 

[Lord Garth]

Ensign Garrovick from "Obsession". I could see him being a Captain by 2293 and in command of the Enterprise-B. He'd be in his late-40s or early-50s by this point. The perfect age to be a seasoned Captain or at least a seasoned officer finally promoted to Captain. Except I wouldn't want to do that to him and have him of all people carrying the burden of Kirk dying under his watch.

So, who would I have if it were someone from TOS? Lieutenant DaSalle would've been a good choice if it weren't for the actor's age. Michael Barrier was born in 1933. That wouldn't have worked. He would've been in his early-60s, assuming they stuck with the same actor.

No one else is jumping out at me from TOS itself. I'm not reading other posts before I type this, because that would be cheating.

It would have to be someone from the TOS Movies. I prefer the idea that whoever is in command of the Enterprise-B is noticeably younger than Kirk. Saavik is the best choice, but I agree that 2293 seems a little too soon.

Weighing everything else, I'd still go with Saavik, despite it being a bit too soon. She could've ended up on the fast-track after TVH. Not something that would be out of line with her having graduated as a Lieutenant. Her first interaction with Kirk on-screen is TWOK, talking about no-win scenarios. Her last interaction with Kirk would be this version of GEN where they win by saving the El-Aurian refuges but end up losing Kirk. It would've been a bookend of sorts.

BUT

I'm glad it was a new character. I'm not glad it was Harriman. He should be way more experienced than he was. At minimum, he should've gained a lot of that experience as a First Officer. As it is, he seems more like an Ensign or Lieutenant who's in way over his head.

 

[Riley]

Agree on all counts. Especially Scotty. For as big a fan of TOS as Ronald D. Moore claims to be, man did he get the character of Scotty wrong.

And McCoy's appearance was a textbook example of how to do a poignant, meaningful, substantive cameo. It was just perfect.

I have to think McCoy's cameo turned out so wonderfully because Roddenberry was still somewhat involved at the very beginning. I don't think he'd have liked what happened to Scotty at all. As for Moore, I wonder how much of that was him and how much it was Berman, who had a general distaste for TOS references and characters.

 

[Riley]

Ensign Garrovick from "Obsession". I could see him being a Captain by 2293 and in command of the Enterprise-B. He'd be in his late-40s or early-50s by this point. The perfect age to be a seasoned Captain or at least a seasoned officer finally promoted to Captain. Except I wouldn't want to do that to him and have him of all people carrying the burden of Kirk dying under his watch.

So, who would I have if it were someone from TOS? Lieutenant DaSalle would've been a good choice if it weren't for the actor's age. Michael Barrier was born in 1933. That wouldn't have worked. He would've been in his early-60s, assuming they stuck with the same actor.

No one else is jumping out at me from TOS itself. I'm not reading other posts before I type this, because that would be cheating.

It would have to be someone from the TOS Movies. I prefer the idea that whoever is in command of the Enterprise-B is noticeably younger than Kirk. Saavik is the best choice, but I agree that 2293 seems a little too soon.

Weighing everything else, I'd still go with Saavik, despite it being a bit too soon. She could've ended up on the fast-track after TVH. Not something that would be out of line with her having graduated as a Lieutenant. Her first interaction with Kirk on-screen is TWOK, talking about no-win scenarios. Her last interaction with Kirk would be this version of GEN where they win by saving the El-Aurian refuges but end up losing Kirk. It would've been a bookend of sorts.

BUT

I'm glad it was a new character. I'm not glad it was Harriman. He should be way more experienced than he was. At minimum, he should've gained a lot of that experience as a First Officer. As it is, he seems more like an Ensign or Lieutenant who's in way over his head.

A lot of good points here. I agree that Harriman should have been far more competent, especially given Ruckman's talents. To your point about the captain being someone from the TOS films, I think that is another point for Chekov. He seems to make the most sense as the captain of the Enterprise-B.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I have to think McCoy's cameo turned out so wonderfully because Roddenberry was still somewhat involved at the very beginning. I don't think he'd have liked what happened to Scotty at all. As for Moore, I wonder how much of that was him and how much it was Berman, who had a general distaste for TOS references and characters.

How much input/influence did Beman have on the writing side at that point?

 

[Lord Garth]

A lot of good points here. I agree that Harriman should have been far more competent, especially given Ruckman's talents. To your point about the captain being someone from the TOS films, I think that is another point for Chekov. He seems to make the most sense as the captain of the Enterprise-B.

I think Chekov would make a good Captain, but you have to look at it from Starfleet's point-of-view. On paper, Chekov was the First Officer of the Reliant, then didn't take on another First Officer position later on, and stayed with Kirk. Some Starfleet Admiral who doesn't know Chekov like we do would ask the question, "Why should we make you a Captain when you didn't even want to be a First Officer anymore?" On paper, they'd think he looks unambitious. Thus, not the type of person who should be Captain of the Enterprise.