|
Zonie63 -> RE: The latest Star Trek movies... (5/20/2013 8:09:55 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: njlauren
I thought it was a lot of fun, which last I checked, is what a movie is about. I wasn't going to see a reboot of War and Piece, I was going to see a new take on a schlocky, lovable tv series to quote William Shatner "it was something I did on a lark". It was seeing an old friend in new light, it had humor, and it was campy, too (I loved in the first one where Nero is talking to Pike, it was almost like some metrosexual saying "Hi Chris, It's Nero, let's do lunch" *lol*. I thing it had its tongue planted firmly in cheek, which I enjoyed, and I liked Kirk as a sardonic punk, and Keith Urban's McCoy got me. It was a good yarn, not perfect, but I didn't really care...and a lot in the old ST was unbelievable, too, but didn't care then, either.
I didn't think that TOS was really all that "schlocky." It may not have been "War and Peace," but it was certainly better than most TV shows and movies of that era. It certainly had a lot more staying power and a devoted fan base. Sure, there have always been haters and critics, those who thought it was a stupid and silly show.
Someone else in this thread suggested that we not compare TOS with the reboot, but that's kind of what ends up happening, since the flaws pointed out in the reboot are often answered by saying that TOS and other Trek productions were similarly flawed.
quote:
ORIGINAL: njlauren
Same was true of TOS, though, Kirk was always breaking the rules..unlike Picard, who had the British uptightness about the prime directive, Jim Kirk was always in trouble..time travel violations, breaking Star Fleet rules, insubordinate to superiors, guy broke the rules all the time...hell, he got a medal for the Kyobashi Maru scenario according to Star Trek II...when he cheated! The argument about Kirk was he had the DNA to do the right thing, and mavericks have always existed, who do things no one ever has done;).
He didn't really start out that way, though. That's not the way he was introduced to the audience when TOS first came out. Yes, there were a few times where Kirk bent the rules, but it wasn't "all the time." William Shatner's Kirk was nowhere near the "rebel without a clue" played by Pine.
There were no time travel violations, since the Temporal Prime Directive didn't exist in TOS. In "Tomorrow is Yesterday," the time travel was an accident, and in "Assignment Earth," the time travel was ostensibly sanctioned and ordered by Star Fleet. In "The City on the Edge of Forever," he had to go back in time to correct the damage caused by McCoy. In Star Trek IV, he went back in time to retrieve humpback whales so they could answer a probe which would have destroyed Earth.
Whatever violations he made, it was for some higher purpose, either to save his ship, his crew, or for some other selfless reason. In Star Trek III, he disobeyed Star Fleet Command because he felt he had a moral obligation to bring Spock's body back to Vulcan. He violated the Prime Directive a few times, although they could be easily explained by differing interpretations of that law. In "Return of the Archons," Kirk suggested that the Prime Directive only applies to healthy societies; perhaps he took a bit of license there, but it can be argued that his actions in that instance were for the greater good (in addition to being necessary to save his crew and his ship from certain destruction). It was the same thing in "The Apple" (which most fans of TOS agree is one of the worst episodes). In many cases, Kirk was compelled to improvise in order to undo damage caused by other humans in the normal development of their planet, such as in "Patterns of Force" and "A Piece of the Action."
Picard also broke his share of rules as well. He violated the Prime Directive on numerous occasions, although in every instance, he had a reasonable explanation.
|
|
|
|
