Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
Star Trek
Byrne Robotics > Star Trek
Topic: What If They’d Rebooted TOS In 1987? Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7747
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 3:41pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

We live in the age of recasting/rehashing/re-imagining/rebooting/whatever R word you want to create. This doesn't just apply to STAR TREK. This is truly a different world now.


In 2009, Abrams' film gave us a Kirk and Spock (among others) who were played by different actors. The aforementioned R words are part and parcel of modern cinema - so it's not surprising.


Let's go back to 1986: the STAR TREK movies featured the original actors. And a year later, in 1987, we got TNG, featuring an all-new cast, boldly going where Kirk, Spock and Bones had gone before. That was the way things were back then.


However, imagine if the "Abrams mindset" and Hollywood reboot fetishization had been around in 1986. This is a "What if?" scenario, but if such mindsets had been around in the 80s, I imagine that instead of TNG, we may well have got "TOS: Mark II" - with new actors taking on the roles of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and others on the small screen. It's not inconceivable if we imagine a different history.


Imagine if it had happened. Imagine how different the progression of the franchise would have been. Where would it have left the movies? Would we have ever seen new and exciting STAR TREK shows? It's all extremely hypothetical, but interesting to think about.


Like I said, it's a different world now. Rumours persist of reboot of THE A-TEAM, featuring actors playing the roles made famous by the likes of George Peppard and Mr. T. It's very much what happens now - but thirty or more years ago, it'd have been inconceivable.


What an interesting world it may have been if, instead of TNG, we'd got a rebooted "TOS: Mark II". Only reason it didn't happen back then (maybe) is because reboot fetishization was not yet a thing.


Any views on my extremely hypothetical post?


EDIT: Posted from my Google Docs, font and other issues fixed.



Edited by Robbie Parry on 12 August 2017 at 3:43pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Warren Scott
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 09 July 2016
Posts: 142
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 5:57pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

I think at the time the first Star Trek movie came out, the fans were very eager to see the original cast back together again. The only way I think a new cast might have worked was if it were set at Starfleet Academy, with young unkown actors in the roles.
As an aside, I will note that I was among fans who felt no one but Leonard Nimoy could satisfactorily play Spock. But now with Nimoy and others gone (and the sad truth that the remaining cast won't be with us forever more obvious), I would kind of hate to see the characters die with the actors. I'd just like to see them played somewhat faithfully (which I feel "Star Trek Beyond" was leaning toward).
Back to Top profile | search
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Beam Me Up, Scotty!

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 108154
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 7:34pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

Meanwhile, this from the IMBd:

"Okay, so it is the mid-sixties and you are casting a brand new television series about the Starship Enterprise that is going to be called 'Star Trek (1966).' This guy named William Shatner has auditioned for the part of series star Captain James Kirk, but you think that he's too 'over the top' and campy in his performance. You want someone more dramatic and with more acting skills (dramatic, romantic, physical, and comedic abilities required). Which actor from that era would you choose?"

sigh

This underscores the real fault of the Abrams messes. Not that the actors were recast, but that what the original actors brought to the roles was completely lost.

Back to Top profile | search
 
Joe Boster
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3055
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 8:15pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

In the book "The Fifty-Year Mission:" Roddenberry and others talk about how fortunate they were to get Shatner and there probably wouldn't have been a TV show without him. Then you start to get into the movies and Robert wise and others say anyone could be the captain. Also in the book Nimoy says the Galileo 7 episode didn't work with Spock as the lead.

Sigh. indeed. 
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Rob Ocelot
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 December 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 674
Posted: 12 August 2017 at 8:59pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

Meanwhile, this from the IMBd:

"Okay, so it is the mid-sixties and you are casting a brand new television series about the Starship Enterprise that is going to be called 'Star Trek (1966).' This guy named William Shatner has auditioned for the part of series star Captain James Kirk, but you think that he's too 'over the top' and campy in his performance. You want someone more dramatic and with more acting skills (dramatic, romantic, physical, and comedic abilities required). Which actor from that era would you choose?"

<smartass>

I'd suggest Jeffrey Hunter

</smartass>




Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Greg Kirkman
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 May 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 13962
Posted: 13 August 2017 at 2:06pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

More and more, I come to the conclusion that, yes, beloved characters should be laid to rest when their actors age out and die. 

Not so much in the case of Superman, Bond, etc. Just the ones who originated in live-action, and were defined by particular actors. Shatner IS Kirk, Nimoy IS Spock, etc. 

While there may be room for new and different interpretations, those actors defined those characters, and anything else will compare in an unfavorable way. That's not fair to either the characters or the new actors playing the roles. 

At best, you get Chris Pine putting in a decent attempt at playing Kirk, but still struggling under Shatner's long shadow. At worst, you get Simon Pegg turning the wacky humor dial up to 11, and not really doing the character of Montgomery Scott any favors.


Edited by Greg Kirkman on 14 August 2017 at 1:01am
Back to Top profile | search e-mail
 
Aleksandar Petrovic
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 January 2017
Location: Canada
Posts: 120
Posted: 13 August 2017 at 11:48pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply


More and more, I come to the conclusion that, yes, beloved characters should be laid to rest when their actors age out and die.

I am with Greg on this one, 100%. My message to the Star Trek folks would be a simple one - you created an interesting universe, so give us some new stories and new characters in it once the original actors are gone.

I abhor reboots. To my mind, they cheapen and invalidate whatever came before, by default they bring an inescapable sense of failure towards the previous incarnation now being rebooted. I resent that. Reboots are an easy way out.
 




Edited by Aleksandar Petrovic on 13 August 2017 at 11:55pm
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian O'Neill
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 13 November 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 1462
Posted: 14 August 2017 at 4:31pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply

Apparently, IMDB's comments approach Youtube's in stupidity.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Robbie Parry
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 June 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7747
Posted: 14 August 2017 at 5:13pm | IP Logged | 9 post reply

Oh, god, IMDb is full of shit, if you ask me.

Thread drift: an IMDB 'trivia' page claims that Christopher Reeve was one of the men down to play Batman in Burton's first movie. I find that very hard to believe, given the film was released in 1989 - and Reeve had played a superhero from 1978-87. I doubt WB would have been looking to cast someone so closely associated with another superhero.

IMDb, much like Wikipedia, has contributors who I feel can type anything they want.

Beware IMDb and Wikipedia 'facts'. 
Back to Top profile | search
 

If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login
If you are not already registered you must first register

  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login