i think TOS also benefits from nostalgia for the kelvin films we zoomers watched growing up.
Will TOS maintain its legendary status as Trek fandom gets younger?
- Thread starter BlueStuff
- Start date
It's impossible to pick a season of any program and say all the episodes in it are good. "Good" is a subjective thing, and what makes it "good" for one person may be what makes it "bad" for another. Just drop into any argument about Kes vs. Seven to see that in action.
This puts me in mind of fans who say they don't like TOS due to the sexist elements, yet they love nuTrek.
They seem to gloss over the scene in nuTrek where nuCarol tells nuKirk not to look at her when she's changing out of her miniskirt into a pair of overalls (or pants, or whatever), and when she catches him peeking, she just stands there, posing in her underwear, and gives him a good, long look...
Hypocrisy, much?
I remember an argument on this forum years ago (in one of the TV threads) in which someone said they couldn't stand black and white movies just because they were black and white.
There was a Katherine Hepburn marathon on TV that weekend, and I decided to watch it - color or black and white made no difference. I enjoyed most of the movies, and who cares if they were in color or not?
Actually, there's one TV series that looks better in black and white. Honestly, the Richard Greene Robin Hood series looks ridiculous in color.
There's even a Downton Abbey parody of Star Wars.
There aren't many nuWho stories I really liked for their overall message, as far too many of them were dumbed-down when the writers wrote themselves into a corner, or demonstrated their complete lack of ability to show that they'd passed elementary-level science.
I liked "Dalek" because it looked at genocide from both sides, and so help me, it had me feeling sorry for a Dalek.
"The Neutral Zone"... I liked Patrick Stewart as an actor. But that episode made me loathe Picard.
Have Picard fans looked at Picard and Riker lately? None of the TNG cast looks particularly young anymore.
TOS may lose its legendary status as fandom gets younger, but the legendary status of foundational characters such as Kirk & Spock will not dimmish—and perhaps even become stronger—with the inevitable re-booted series featuring them all together aboard the U.S.S. Enterprise on Paramount+ —something we all know will happen eventually.
Paramount has already given us younger versions of Kirk, Spock, Chapel, & Uhura via Discovery/Strange New Worlds—how long will it be before we see younger versions of Scotty, McCoy, Sulu and Chekov join them in a new version of TOS (or even on SNW, depending on how long the series lasts)? I think that eventual series set aboard the original Enterprise will energize (no pun intended) the love for those classic characters in a new generation of fans.
When that happens, the message boards here could soon be littered with enthusiastic posts about those very same classic TOS characters—but from episodes in their new, re-booted series—and with those posts being written by young fans who have never seen an episode of TOS.
In short, the legend will live on.
Paramount has already given us younger versions of Kirk, Spock, Chapel, & Uhura via Discovery/Strange New Worlds—how long will it be before we see younger versions of Scotty, McCoy, Sulu and Chekov join them in a new version of TOS (or even on SNW, depending on how long the series lasts)? I think that eventual series set aboard the original Enterprise will energize (no pun intended) the love for those classic characters in a new generation of fans.
When that happens, the message boards here could soon be littered with enthusiastic posts about those very same classic TOS characters—but from episodes in their new, re-booted series—and with those posts being written by young fans who have never seen an episode of TOS.
In short, the legend will live on.
Last edited:
I tend to agree with the notion that there will be at least some presence in the wider culture for TOS characters but I do think it is on a downward slope. Part of this is raw distance in time from the show and movies, as well as the fact that the entertainment landscape is more fragmented than ever and we're several generations out from people who watched TOS when it aired and showed it to their kids.
It's funny, between NEM and PIC, the franchise was in a pretty strong and single-minded TOS nostalgia phase; all of its efforts were directed either at the characters or the time period. After DSC ends we'll see if they do the same but with TNG...right now it looks like a TNG/VOY combo which is already more diverse.
It's funny, between NEM and PIC, the franchise was in a pretty strong and single-minded TOS nostalgia phase; all of its efforts were directed either at the characters or the time period. After DSC ends we'll see if they do the same but with TNG...right now it looks like a TNG/VOY combo which is already more diverse.
I hadn't considered TNG as standing still when it came to breaking barriers compared to the other series. That's an interesting take on it. Maybe that safeness is a large part of its broader, mainstream popularity and appeal. I do think the series had a great cast, good special effects, and many well-written stories. And arguably, for its time, it was a diverse series with an ensemble cast that relatively got more development than the TOS cast.
What you said makes me wonder if the TOS nostalgia post-NEM didn't stem from the idea that TOS was the largely unqualified successful Trek at that time. TNG had been sullied by Nemesis and ENT was flailing before it was canceled. So, the suits wanted to harken back to TOS because that was at the time the most successful, in the public imagination, version of Trek.
I think it had more to do with the idea that to keep up with 24th Century Star Trek you were supposed to have watched all of TNG/DS9/VOY. ENT was a prequel probably more for that reason, but I don't think the prequel angle translated well to the general audience who probably thought it was simply another TNG spinoff. So they went back to the TOS well, and essentially rebooted Star Trek to get new audiences in on ground level.
That makes a ton of sense! Especially given how sour everything felt after NEM.
I could see that. I was also thinking that DS9 and VOY, while both had their fans, didn't seize the public imagination like TNG had. So, if TNG floundered at the box office, and ENT was struggling in the ratings, I can see why going back to TOS to get back to basics would make sense as opposed to sticking in the 24th century, or even going into the 25th or beyond. Personally, I would've loved a Riker-Troi Titan spin off, or a Sulu/Excelsior spin off before ENT came out, but I can see why they would want to go back to TOS for inspiration.
Yeah, similar to TNG, both started out with weaker initial seasons before ultimately hitting their stride, so I can see general audiences tuning out early and never getting hooked.
A Captain Sulu show probably would have been a better VOY follow-up. Sulu had the TOS name recognition factor, plus it still provided a jumping in point not dependent on being familiar with twenty-one seasons of backstory. However, I think they probably would have needed to recast Sulu, a sixty-plus year old Takai was probably pushing it, and recasting Sulu would have emphasized that it was indeed something new and not more of the same.
True.
Agreed: TNG was not ground-breaking (in a natural sense for the demands of the series format).
Which was absurd. Data was used as the faux-Spock of TNG (effectively bumping Riker--the in-series second in command / "action" character--to the third wheel position), but Spock--due to his mixed race issues--was something viewers either related to on a personal level, or were aware of the issue's existence in the real world. His struggles, pride or pain could speak to viewers. That could not be replicated with a glorified Space Pinocchio.
TNG has appeared that way for some time; unlike TOS, few of TNG's designs were revolutionary to filmed sci-fi, and often appeared not much more innovative that Glen Larson's train-wrecks Battlestar Galactica and Buck Rogers in the 25th Century (in fact some of the same sci-fi set dressing / props ended up used for TNG).
Age of an IP does not necessarily mean its loses its appeal to / awareness from younger generations; the Universal monster films proved that from one generation to another, as the films were constantly re-released, packaged for international syndication, and appearing on every home media format for more than 4 decades, with the best of its lot still regarded as landmark films. Without question, the Universal monster franchise has the greatest ancillary market presence of any movie characters sharing the same name. That's not appealing to Depression and WW2-era audiences. Its long become a multi-generation, cultural heirloom.
James Bond had six actors portray the spy in the EON series, yet Connery--with his last Bond film released fifty-one years ago for is still widely seen as the most popular / face of the franchise. TOS is arguably in the same position, with it being the franchise face / has the strongest multi-generation appeal and cultural impact. The Berman, JJ and CBS Trek are nowhere near that level when each iteration had its chance.
Just had a thought that a post-VOY Excelsior series could also bring in Tuvok from time to time. I don't think they would, or should, recast Sulu. I think a lot of the appeal of an Excelsior series would be based on Takei. I could've seen them putting a lot of younger actors in the cast to do a lot of the action scenes. Sulu would be the wise elder statesmen who embodies Federation values and gives impassioned, inspiring speeches about them. I have thought for years an Excelsior series would also have been a great avenue to expand on Uhura and Chekov as well, either by making them part of the cast, recurring characters, or giving them special episodes.
My friends and I watch random episodes of Trek every week together. It's something we just started up this year. I roll an online dice and then grab an episode based on which number it landed on, based on broadcast order. Of the six of us, only me and my wife have watched TOS - and a couple of our friends have watched and rewatched literally every other show. I think a lot of people are just put off by how outdated it looks. Me, I watch it like a stage play. I can see the seams, but that's not the point. But I seem to be in the minority.
That said, last week, we watched Balance of Terror, and while there's usually some good natured chattered during episodes, especially TOS episodes, you could have heard a pin drop during the tense moments of that episode. So I think it's on us, people who appreciate TOS, to make sure fans of the series don't leave it totally behind.
The very best episodes of TOS still totally hold up!
I've noticed my teenaged kids, who both love going to see live performances, seem to be more engaged watching TOS than Berman-era Trek. I think because it is colorful, stagey and theatrical, it has a vibrancy that holds their attention better.
If that was the case, I doubt TOS' costumes, sets, etc. would have been so perfectly integrated with DS9's "Trials and Tribble-ations" and ENT's 2-part "In a Mirror, Darkly". All three eras were seamlessly blended, with next to no one questioning TOS being the future of ENT, or the natural past of DS9.
TOS will be fine. Over a half century later, it has not lost its rightful place as the face of the franchise and is the only version of ST to have transcended its format to achieve pop cultural / modern myth status. TNG--the biggest post-TOS Star Trek series--is 36 years old with 4 movies and a spin-off series and its never reached that kind of appeal or importance.
Eh, I dunno. A lot of younger Trek fans seem to enjoy TOS despite its obvious flaws. But they love the Kirk/Spock slash. They love the way the characters interact. They love the cheesy dialog that is still somehow relatable.
Don't throw tomatoes now, but I actually think to them TNG is the more outdated show. It seems to bore them (and I can see why, it's an incredibly "save" show, you can often almost hear the "let's not upset anyone too much" Berman mantra playing in the background). They don't have the nostalgia glasses watching it, and if you watch it without those, it can be... well... tedious whereas TOS just seems to hold up much better with its more "flawed" characters, dialog, set design, etc.
Don't throw tomatoes now, but I actually think to them TNG is the more outdated show. It seems to bore them (and I can see why, it's an incredibly "save" show, you can often almost hear the "let's not upset anyone too much" Berman mantra playing in the background). They don't have the nostalgia glasses watching it, and if you watch it without those, it can be... well... tedious whereas TOS just seems to hold up much better with its more "flawed" characters, dialog, set design, etc.
I'm always a little baffled that people say TOS looked cardboard and cheesy. I mean, for it's time, it was pretty frigging amazing. Some of the stuff they did with sets and matte paintings was unbelievable for a television production almost 60 years ago. The sets, while clearly a product of their time, never looked cheap or "cardboard" to me.
I don't know...maybe it's just because I grew up with the re-runs...but I never felt the show "looked bad."
I don't know...maybe it's just because I grew up with the re-runs...but I never felt the show "looked bad."
I don't think so. Even now, there are people who like TNG (or DS9, etc) better than TOS. I hear there are even people wathing Disco and newers.
(They are all wrong, of course. Star Trek is Kirk and Kirk is Shatner)
(They are all wrong, of course. Star Trek is Kirk and Kirk is Shatner)
Although I hear the idea repeated with some frequency, personally I don't 'get' the idea of not being able to relate to something simply because it's from before my time. I think the vast majority of products of 'my time' are forgettable slop, and I much prefer media from my grandparents' and parents' times, be it movies, music, television, novels, or what have you. 60s TV makes me feel all warm and fuzzy in a way that nothing actually of my generation ever manages. When it comes to newer media, I generally gravitate toward indie stuff that most people in my circles haven't even heard of. It's not unlike food. I like cutting-edge foodie cuisine and authentic international foods, and I like the old-fashioned classics that are falling by the wayside. But I'm not big on franchise stuff at all. Most modern broadcast television today is like McDonalds or Applebee's. TOS is Steak Diane or Chicken à la King. It may be different from contemporary tastes, but give it a try and you could be pleasantly surprised.
Kor
Kor
Similar threads
