 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And yet Star Trek somehow struggled on with, let's see, four additional series - each of which with many more episodes than the original - plus four additional movies, all without the Troika of Destiny.
I defer to no-one in my love of the original series, but for me and for many Trekkiers Star Trek works well in every incarnation, even with the various changes and compromises (except for me the doomed Enterprise, which was forced into retcon and retread hell). There are episodes of TNG, DS9 and Voyager that for me are as strong as and sometimes stronger than the first's strongest episodes.
So it isn't only about the T of D. Though Solium is absolutely right, Shatner/Nimoy/Kelley were lightning in a bottle and that strength of character dynamic was never captured again. Armin Shimerman and Rene Auberjonois come close with their double act in DS9, but they together weren't central to the arc of the series, so it never mattered as much.
(Should that be Trek-a of Destiny? Trekkers of Destiny?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am four seasons into DS-9 and this probably comes closer to TOS than anything since it went of the air.
And, please, i dont wanna hear about that shameless rip-off TNG
brm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One more thing about Star Trek pitched as Wagon Train to the stars: this always struck me as an apt description of the first series, and elements throughout all the series.
For Wagon Train and Star Trek, there is an ongoing journey with new destinations. The people involved are venturing into uncharted land / strange new worlds (for them, anyway, though there are often natives there already). The stories can be about people / aliens / situations encountered on the journey or individuals within the wagon train / ship - as happens repeatedly in Star Trek (all those female scientists introduced and dispatched in a single episode). Or the focus can be on the main, regular characters - or in some combination - main character getting involved with someone encountered on the journey. Many, many episodes turn on a moral crisis or drama of good/evil. And episodes could cross many genres - drama, comedy, romance, thriller.
Context is everything, so a western like Wagon Train and a science fiction franchise like Star Trek are remotely connected at best, but much of the scaffolding is the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No argument, and I'm not thinking about this really from the point of view of the pitch or giving the company what it wants, just about the limited number of ways you can set up a long-running episodic program that is not designed to be a serial.
Also, to be fair, there are rolling on the ground fights in the first pilot too. With monsters, even!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...my problem." ..., I never had a problem with Wesley Crusher ...
That doesn't surprise me in the least
brm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, the current iteration of Star Trek as a series of theatrical features is a play for the same people who are going to see Ant-Man and The Hunger Games. This is Hollywood as it is; not as we would wish it to be.
Yet, eventually, Viacom will seek to squeeze more revenue out of its property after the J.J. formulation has run its course and the "millennials" have absorbed the canon of the past. The time will then be ripe for Star Trek to be lovingly rendered as it should be: as remakes/expansions of original series episodes which had only a fraction of their potential realized the first time around.
I give it about fifteen years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Drop_Forge's first thought was the same as mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
