TV: The All - Encompassing Star Trek Thread. Debate Long + Prosper

[Osprey]

Yeah, but do the others go around posting stuff like this?

 

[Roo Returns]

Er, there are three white Caucasian males who were good with the ladies in the graphic.

Four if you count Spock.

Spock is the alien/"outsider" of the original group and pretty much was until Star Trek II (actually the thirteen years between TMP when they did another five year mission in the pajama unis, and the eight years he was captain of the Enterprise). He learned that these people are his family and that his human side is ok to embrace. Meyer wrote the best version of an evolved and seasoned Spock.

This retcon version of Pike is "theirs" (NuTrek) so he's ok.

Picard was beaten down and deconstructed into a NuTrek version.

And Archer was ok with the ladies..I guess. He wasn't as swashbuckling as the others.

Because it's safe. Setting a movie in a period where they have established fiction before and after it means that they have a safe space where everything is defined for them and they can comfortably nestle the story into a web of pre-set pathing and obviously identifiable teases towards the story's future direction. Because the studios will argue (and to some extent they're right) that people don't want daring new ideas where there are no safety rails to stop you from falling over the edge and plummeting to your doom. They want the comfortable feeling of familiarity that lets them go "I know this thing and I know that other thing they're talking about!" and end up with a story that gives them everything they want with no risk or threat that it's going to shake up a known status quo too badly or confront them with a direction that challenges them or makes them uncomfortable.

It's why prequels are the thing du jour. Game of Thrones wraps and we go right into a prequel because it means we know where the story has to end up. Lord of the Rings wraps and we get the Hobbit largely because it was the only thing in the Tolkien ouvre that gave them enough runway to even pretend that their story was based on his content but then we do The Rings of Power which is an original story that is a prequel.

Or in a broader sense, take one of my other big fandoms (as evidenced by my avatar), The Transformers. They did the original toyline, cartoon, comics, and movie in a span from about 1984 until around 1991. Then with the franchise sputtering they reinvented it as Beast Wars, a radically different take on the concept that was eventually plugged in to be set way off in the distant future, far beyond the reach of the original fiction. Then it ended and into the late 90s and early 2000s there were a quartet of anime series that each told a somewhat unique variation of the story that in some cases may or may not have tied to one another. But then came the Michael Bay movies. And the comic book series from Dreamwave and then IDW. And every cartoon they made from about 2010 onwards. And each of those things has more or less been rehashing the same basic beats of the original 1984+ story over and over and over again to the point that you know almost exactly what you're getting in terms of a broad strokes picture: Autobots vs Decepticons, Optimus Prime as a big red truck vs Megatron probably as a big silver tank or spaceship or whatever because he can't be a gun. Fighter jet Starscream looking to usurp Megatron, friendly yellow Bumblebee, a millennia-old war brought to Earth, magic macguffin thing that grants fantastic power, etc. It's not 100% identical but there has never been the same sort of inventiveness or creativity that defined the franchise from about 1995 to 2009 or so.

And that's where Star Trek is too. A series that's going to hit 60 years old this decade hasn't, with 2 exceptions, produced an original work that doesn't just give us a new take on a familiar thing (The Abrams movies, Strange New Worlds, Picard since it is explicitly "TNG but old dudes") or a new thing within a construct of familiarity (Discovery at least from where it started off being set back in a TOS-ish era) since Voyager wrapped up over 20 goddamn years ago. Those exceptions? Prodigy, a kids-focused show that tanked, and Lower Decks, another cartoon. The only thing holding Trek to its bold vision of moving forward into the future is the animated arm that you get the impression only has the freedom to do what it wants because it lacks the prestige of live action film and TV.



I've always felt like it was two different things for each actor. Nimoy seemed to resent that his notoriety as Spoke pigeonholed him in terms of getting acting gigs. He did that brief run as Paris on Mission Impossible in order to replace Martin Landau but otherwise he felt chained down by Spock the character preventing people from seeing him as anything else. Meanwhile William Shatner got steady(ish) work with TJ Hooker, Rescue 911, Boston Legal, etc and it felt like his backlash was less about the machinations of the hollywood machine and more like watching an accomplished stage actor grumble about how the only thing they're remembered for is a kitschy, low-brow role that they felt was "beneath" them. Obviously Galaxy Quest largely meant for Tim Allen's character to be the Kirk send-up but I see some paralells in Shatner's attitude portrayed in Alan Rickman's character loathing of his endless association with this one role.

So it's like Nimoy's issue was "I can't get other work because you only think of me as Spock" vs Shatner's issue being "I can get work but no matter what you only think of me as Kirk."

It's a huge problem in Hollywood now. Everything is safe and risks or evolutions aren't allowed.

I still say the real downfall is losing the B-studios like Orion, Hammer, De Laurentis. They made low budget scifi and action and kept the big studios in check.

 

[Lshap]

Shatner has been taking some shots at current ST promo imagery recently.

It is kind of insane that streaming era Trek always seems to try and minimize him.

For what it's worth, lots of Paramount's Star Trek promos include Shatner, although it's bizarre that any of them don't.

 

[Osprey]

For what it's worth, lots of Paramount's Star Trek promos include Shatner, although it's bizarre that any of them don't.

I just checked and here are the Star Trek Day promos from 2020 and 2021:



So, Shatner's claim that it's been going on for years may not be entirely accurate (unless he's referring to other omissions). Kirk is really small in all of those and the stars of the recent shows are much bigger, but, however cringey, it's expected for marketing to focus on the new shows. That said, as you suggested, he shouldn't be missing entirely, and he is from both the 2022 and 2023 promos. So, Shatner has a point that it's nothing new this year, but he might've exaggerated how long it's been going on.

 

[The Nemesis]

I've been binging through some trivia and other stuff about episodes of the older shows and found something fun today:

We're now in the year that Sisko, O'Brien, and Dax get pulled back to in that DS9 2-parter where they're stuck in the 21st century in the middle of what will become a massive riot and Sisko has to impersonate the pivotal historical figure, Gabriel Bell, after he gets killed accidentally thanks to them. They were sent back to 2024. Though they were sent back to a date that's like 8 months from now. So we'll see if I remember to come back and point out when we reach the exact date of the Bell Riots.

So... I guess now matter how crappy the world has been over the last 4-8 years or whatever, at least we don't have massive walled off city districts that all the poor and undesirables are shoved into (yet).

 

[johnjm22]

Kirk is really small in all of those and the stars of the recent shows are much bigger, but, though cringey, it's expected for marketing to focus on the new shows. That said, as you said, he shouldn't be missing entirely, and he is from both of the 2022 and 2023 promos.

Then why are characters like Janeway, Sisko and Uhura, just as, if not more prominent in some of those than Kirk?

It has felt to me that Shatner's Kirk has been getting de-emphasized for awhile.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I've been binging through some trivia and other stuff about episodes of the older shows and found something fun today:

We're now in the year that Sisko, O'Brien, and Dax get pulled back to in that DS9 2-parter where they're stuck in the 21st century in the middle of what will become a massive riot and Sisko has to impersonate the pivotal historical figure, Gabriel Bell, after he gets killed accidentally thanks to them. They were sent back to 2024. Though they were sent back to a date that's like 8 months from now. So we'll see if I remember to come back and point out when we reach the exact date of the Bell Riots.

So... I guess now matter how crappy the world has been over the last 4-8 years or whatever, at least we don't have massive walled off city districts that all the poor and undesirables are shoved into (yet).

Two years later, in a 4th season DS9 episode, in a throwaway bit of dialogue, Nog notes that Gabriel Bell looks a lot like Captain Sisko. Quark dismisses it by saying that all human look alike. It's one of the best callbacks in the franchise's history.

 

[The Nemesis]

Two years later, in a 4th season DS9 episode, in a throwaway bit of dialogue, Nog notes that Gabriel Bell looks a lot like Captain Sisko. Quark dismisses it by saying that all human look alike. It's one of the best callbacks in the franchise's history.

Yeah, I loved that. Sort of like in the wreckage of the Enterprise D after it crashes in Generations Picard goes through some of the stuff they're digging out of the remains of his ready room/quarters and he finds the remains of the Kurlan Naiskos that his mentor gave him in a 5th or 6th season episode (the one where they discover that a precursor race "seeded" a bunch of planets with variants of their DNA millions of years ago and that's why the Star Trek universe has so many species that are humanoid shaped) and the tapestry he got from that proto-Romulan lady from the episode where they mistakenly start believing Picard is their god. The props department didn't have to go that far to make sure that those things stayed consistent for a scene that was just wreckage, but they did.

 

[Osprey]

Then why are characters like Janeway, Sisko and Uhura, just as, if not more prominent in some of those than Kirk?

It has felt to me that Shatner's Kirk has been getting de-emphasized for awhile.

Honestly, it seems somewhat random to me. Kirk is smaller than Janeway and Sisko in the first poster, but larger than both in the second and equal in size in the third. As for Uhura, she's larger than Kirk in the third, but equal to him in the first and completely missing in the second. Going further, Spock is in only the first and Archer is in only the second. At least Kirk is in all three, unlike Uhura, Spock and Archer, even if he's not terribly big.

Kirk probably has been de-emphasized for a while, but some of that is probably that CBS/Paramount keeps making new shows with newer characters or newer versions of old characters to promote. Lots of characters don't get much attention anymore. There used to be a time when nearly every Star Trek poster included Bones, but when's the last time that you saw one with him? He's gotten it worse than Kirk.

That said, leaving Kirk off of Star Trek Day promos the last two years is definitely suspicious and inexcusable, IMO. I don't disagree that it probably has some to do with the current regime not being very proud of the character or actor or both.

 

[NyQuil]

That said, leaving Kirk off of Star Trek Day promos the last two years is definitely suspicious and inexcusable, IMO. I don't disagree that it probably has some to do with the current regime not being very proud of the character or actor or both.

I honestly think it's a misguided attempt to make people think of someone else aside from Kirk when it comes to the Star Trek universe.

There's still a very substantial number of people whose first thought when it comes to Star Trek is William Shatner and Captain Kirk. His shadow looms large over the entire franchise for casual people.

Trekkers have an appreciation for all of the different Captains, but Picard doesn't really exist in the zeigeist the way "We come in peace, shoot to kill" does.

They keep rebooting Kirk in different ways because it's easy and still manages to work. I think Trekkers complain about it bitterly (I know I do) but will still watch them.

The guy I think who ends up most slighted by the latest banner is the current Spock played by Ethan Peck. He's actually still on TV in new episodes and they have Leonard Nimoy instead.

It's still weird, I'll admit. It ends up attracting more attention because of the omission.

 

[Roo Returns]

I honestly think it's a misguided attempt to make people think of someone else aside from Kirk when it comes to the Star Trek universe.

There's still a very substantial number of people whose first thought when it comes to Star Trek is William Shatner and Captain Kirk. His shadow looms large over the entire franchise for casual people.

Trekkers have an appreciation for all of the different Captains, but Picard doesn't really exist in the zeigeist the way "We come in peace, shoot to kill" does.

They keep rebooting Kirk in different ways because it's easy and still manages to work. I think Trekkers complain about it bitterly (I know I do) but will still watch them.

The guy I think who ends up most slighted by the latest banner is the current Spock played by Ethan Peck. He's actually still on TV in new episodes and they have Leonard Nimoy instead.

It's still weird, I'll admit. It ends up attracting more attention because of the omission.

I still don't understand why they have to bring in every TOS character to SNW. It doesn't really serve a purpose other than fanservice and just causes more confusion and recton.

Also, I like the lady who plays Mitchell (she should get more screen time), but where's Jose Tyler? At least mention him.

Finally, is it a little weird to everyone that Uhura is an Ensign in Season Two of SNW and that means it's going to take her like a decade to get to Lt. by the TOS mission? Writers whiffed on that one.

 

[The Macho King]

I still don't understand why they have to bring in every TOS character to SNW. It doesn't really serve a purpose other than fanservice and just causes more confusion and recton.

Also, I like the lady who plays Mitchell (she should get more screen time), but where's Jose Tyler? At least mention him.

Finally, is it a little weird to everyone that Uhura is an Ensign in Season Two of SNW and that means it's going to take her like a decade to get to Lt. by the TOS mission? Writers whiffed on that one.

I will say - I absolutely adore the Balance of Terror from Pike's perspective episode in Season 1. Thematically fit really well, and also just showed great respect to TOS and Kirk.

 

[johnjm22]

Honestly, it seems somewhat random to me. Kirk is smaller than Janeway and Sisko in the first poster, but larger than both in the second and equal in size in the third. As for Uhura, she's larger than Kirk in the third, but equal to him in the first and completely missing in the second. Going further, Spock is in only the first and Archer is in only the second. At least Kirk is in all three, unlike Uhura, Spock and Archer, even if he's not terribly big.

Kirk probably has been de-emphasized for a while, but some of that is probably that CBS/Paramount keeps making new shows with newer characters or newer versions of old characters to promote. Lots of characters don't get much attention anymore. There used to be a time when nearly every Star Trek poster included Bones, but when's the last time that you saw one with him? He's gotten it worse than Kirk.

That said, leaving Kirk off of Star Trek Day promos the last two years is definitely suspicious and inexcusable, IMO. I don't disagree that it probably has some to do with the current regime not being very proud of the character or actor or both.

"My name is Gene"
"I already forgot"

Maybe it's just a coincidence and they weren't referencing Gene Roddenberry.


When minor Star Trek actor Manu Intiraymi criticized Anthony Rapp, they wrote a scene in Picard where they brought back his character (Icheb) and tortured him by gouging his eyes. Coincidence? I don't think it is. And I think it's very petty.

Shatner has criticized modern Star Trek before, and I think that's the reason he's deemphasized on the official promo materials. Shatner also seems to not have social and political views that are inline which I suspect is part of it as well.

 

[Roo Returns]

I will say - I absolutely adore the Balance of Terror from Pike's perspective episode in Season 1. Thematically fit really well, and also just showed great respect to TOS and Kirk.

It was a good episode and the Admiral Pike in the maroon uniform at the end was cool. My only issue is it's another alternate timeline or butterfly effect episode. TNG did a bunch, heck Season 2 of Picard was all about that.

"My name is Gene"
"I already forgot"

Maybe it's just a coincidence and they weren't referencing Gene Roddenberry.


When minor Star Trek actor Manu Intiraymi criticized Anthony Rapp, they wrote a scene in Picard where they brought back his character (Icheb) and tortured him by gouging his eyes. Coincidence? I don't think it is. And I think it's very petty.

Shatner has criticized modern Star Trek before, and I think that's the reason he's deemphasized on the official promo materials. Shatner also seems to not have social and political views that are inline which I suspect is part of it as well.

Manu Intiraymi could've just said no if the part stunk, Avery Brooks, Colm Meaney, Robert Beltran, etc. never came back.

 

[HolyGhost]

Honestly, it seems somewhat random to me. Kirk is smaller than Janeway and Sisko in the first poster, but larger than both in the second and equal in size in the third. As for Uhura, she's larger than Kirk in the third, but equal to him in the first and completely missing in the second. Going further, Spock is in only the first and Archer is in only the second. At least Kirk is in all three, unlike Uhura, Spock and Archer, even if he's not terribly big.

Kirk probably has been de-emphasized for a while, but some of that is probably that CBS/Paramount keeps making new shows with newer characters or newer versions of old characters to promote. Lots of characters don't get much attention anymore. There used to be a time when nearly every Star Trek poster included Bones, but when's the last time that you saw one with him? He's gotten it worse than Kirk.

That said, leaving Kirk off of Star Trek Day promos the last two years is definitely suspicious and inexcusable, IMO. I don't disagree that it probably has some to do with the current regime not being very proud of the character or actor or both.

He shot his mouth off, insulted the creators, writers, actors and the who.does the craft services. So sorry. There is payback for the shit he said

 

[Osprey]

He shot his mouth off, insulted the creators, writers, actors and the who.does the craft services. So sorry. There is payback for the shit he said

I had no idea that he insulted even the people who serve snacks and refreshment on set. In that case, he got what he deserved!

 

[johnjm22]

Manu Intiraymi could've just said no if the part stunk

He wasn't offered the role. I listened to an entire podcast interview with him and that seemed pretty clear.

He said he hoped the reason for his character's seemingly unnecessarily gruesome treatment wasn't because of stuff he said in real life, but he doesn't know.