Would 'The Savage Curtain' have been better...

[Gary7]

Yeah, but "Savage" is "the-one-with-Abraham Lincoln," and I think the writer and actor do a nice job of making him a real person.

MacArthur?! Who violated the chain of command, did what he wanted, and wanted to a-bomb China? Oh, yeah, I guess you're right, Kirk woulda loved him!

I absolutely agree, that the writing and acting for the role of Lincoln was excellent--very convincing. No doubt about it.

I guess my problem with The Savage Curtain is that there isn't a clear definition of the kinds of good and evil that should be pitted against each other. The Excalbians were seeking to pit good against evil and "discover which is the stronger", in a scenario similar to what we saw on Arena--opponents thrown into a neutral "arena" and forced to fashion weapons from the surroundings. As a fair test, wouldn't we expect that the Excalbians would have chosen people who would have comparable skills, knowledge, and experience? Then you'd see whether or not the "good" or "evil" mindset would have the advantage.

Kirk - Colonel Green
Spock - Zora
Surak - Kahless
Lincoln - Genghis Khan

That seems to be the most logical mapping... and yet, I find it lacking. Surak founded the modern day Vulcan civilization, while Kahless was a legendary warrior; two totally different kinds of people. Kirk and Colonel Green are both commanders... that kind of works. Spock and Zora are both scientists, which seems to match. Lincoln was the leader of a nation during a very fractured period and repaired the union, while Genghis Khan united many nomadic tribes and ended up dominating an entire continent--Khan was first and foremost a military man and his uniting of people extended to a scale far beyond Lincoln, whereas Lincoln was but a simple man, intelligent and forthright, who united one nation.

One glaring flaw--wouldn't Genghis Khan have been the dominant one over Colonel Green, given the scale of achievements? Or perhaps Khan was outclassed by the technological understandings of the Colonel...

Anyway, I can't really offer any good substitutes... maybe Eisenhower should have been matched with Genghis Khan, because of his strong military experience. But then, in the episode Genghis Khan was but a minor non-speaking character who just threw rocks, so perhaps it really didn't matter!

 

[USS Mariner]

I do like the idea of using Khan, though it might have complicated the situation beyond what they wanted, considering that he and Kirk would be the only participants who have actually met in life. As batshit insane as the Excalbians were, I'd think that even they could sense a problem with that pairing.

 

[Wingsley]

I think that if it were possible to bring the TOS cast from 1968 to today and re-shoot the whole ep with the original music and props, they would have to re-do all the "guest starring" combatants, and stage a more creative conflict for them to duel in. The whole notion of Excalbians learning about human behavior by reducing a starship captain to bow and arrows and throwing rocks and fisticuffs always struck my as silly and boring. You'd think that if the Excablians could take a parcel of their volcanic planet, make it habitable for humans, and then reach up and cripple the Enterprise while recreating figures from the Federation's past, they could've created a more interesting conflict to put Kirk in.

Of all the weird "most dangerous game" TOS stories, "Savage" is the flattest. "Gamesters" and "Bread and Circuses" were far better takes on this concept. Even "Arena" was more interesting than "Savage".

If I could wave a magic wand and re-create a pure TOS show, and all I had was "Savage" to re-create, I'd want Kirk and Spock to be teamed up with Surak and John F. Kennedy from his PT-109 days. It would be interesting, though to show Kirk in an ego battle with George C. Scott's "Patton". Talk about dueling Prima Donnas!

As far as "bad guys" are concerned, it would be interesting to see Kirk punch Osama La Bomba in the kisser, or Adolph Hitler, or Hideki Tōjō.

 

[Praetor]

I wonder if they purposefully avoided WWII figures since it was so recent and Trek was trying to suggest we'd get over all that one day, but felt that might be dredging recent wounds a bit too much?

 

[Kryton]

I wonder if they purposefully avoided WWII figures since it was so recent and Trek was trying to suggest we'd get over all that one day, but felt that might be dredging recent wounds a bit too much?

Seems unlikely, considering that a sitcom set in a German POW Stalag ran in the same era.

And "Hogan's Heroes" was produced by Bing Crosby, no less.

 

[plynch]

Yeah, but "Savage" is "the-one-with-Abraham Lincoln," and I think the writer and actor do a nice job of making him a real person.

MacArthur?! Who violated the chain of command, did what he wanted, and wanted to a-bomb China? Oh, yeah, I guess you're right, Kirk woulda loved him!

I absolutely agree, that the writing and acting for the role of Lincoln was excellent--very convincing. No doubt about it.

I guess my problem with The Savage Curtain is that there isn't a clear definition of the kinds of good and evil that should be pitted against each other. The Excalbians were seeking to pit good against evil and "discover which is the stronger", in a scenario similar to what we saw on Arena--opponents thrown into a neutral "arena" and forced to fashion weapons from the surroundings. As a fair test, wouldn't we expect that the Excalbians would have chosen people who would have comparable skills, knowledge, and experience? Then you'd see whether or not the "good" or "evil" mindset would have the advantage.

Kirk - Colonel Green
Spock - Zora
Surak - Kahless
Lincoln - Genghis Khan

That seems to be the most logical mapping... and yet, I find it lacking. Surak founded the modern day Vulcan civilization, while Kahless was a legendary warrior; two totally different kinds of people. Kirk and Colonel Green are both commanders... that kind of works. Spock and Zora are both scientists, which seems to match. Lincoln was the leader of a nation during a very fractured period and repaired the union, while Genghis Khan united many nomadic tribes and ended up dominating an entire continent--Khan was first and foremost a military man and his uniting of people extended to a scale far beyond Lincoln, whereas Lincoln was but a simple man, intelligent and forthright, who united one nation.

One glaring flaw--wouldn't Genghis Khan have been the dominant one over Colonel Green, given the scale of achievements? Or perhaps Khan was outclassed by the technological understandings of the Colonel...

Anyway, I can't really offer any good substitutes... maybe Eisenhower should have been matched with Genghis Khan, because of his strong military experience. But then, in the episode Genghis Khan was but a minor non-speaking character who just threw rocks, so perhaps it really didn't matter!

I think they were just trying to to make an-episode-withh-Abraham-Lincoln-in-it to stick on the air at 10 on a Friday.

 

[Praetor]

I wonder if they purposefully avoided WWII figures since it was so recent and Trek was trying to suggest we'd get over all that one day, but felt that might be dredging recent wounds a bit too much?

Seems unlikely, considering that a sitcom set in a German POW Stalag ran in the same era.

And "Hogan's Heroes" was produced by Bing Crosby, no less.

True, but 'Hogan's" (great show, BTW) was a comedy whereas the great GR was apparently trying to make a big political statement with Star Trek... or something.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Alvin York, thats who Kirk should have brought to the game.

 

[NathanielM]

It would have been interesting if the Excalbians had chosen
On the bad side: Rush Limbaugh, Pat Buchanan
On the good side: Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton

But Jimmy Carter's a wee little shit. And Clinton's liable to get winded pretty quick.

Better to take Obama, since he looks like he knows kung-fu.

Add James Carville (who could ugly the bad guys to death) and you've got a winning ticket.

Joe, un-wee

Oh no even better!

Ronald "Arms Control" Reagan and Clint Eastwood (good side)

Dr. Ruth, Pope Bendect and Adolph Hitler! (bad side)

lolololol