MickeyCharacter Matters
After 40 years the old Star Trek series is still a popular rerun. As antiquated as some of their storylines are (though back then they hadn't been re-used that much), and even with the plywood starship sets and paper mache boulders, the show is still running on TV and selling DVDs- the new Holy Grail of the TV business. In September Paramount began syndicating an "updated" version with digital special effects replacing the old space shots and touching up the painted planet exteriors, and even a few of the interior scenes' special effects.
What has kept the original series going strong while the more modern versions have slipped (Next Generation into a series of less and less popular movies, and Voyager and Enterprise into ratings nosedives)? Many fans have (justifiably) pointed at the quality of the writing. The original series often had classic scripts, written (or at least inspired by) real science fiction authors. By the middle of Voyager they were buying their scripts in bulk from Spatial Anomalies 'R' Us.
While it's true the decade that saw the franchise finally dying (don't worry; it's just the temporary sort of death pioneered by Mr. Spock and Ensign Kim) produced scripts that inspired quite a few inventive variations of the word "suck," I think a more direct reason for the failures of the more recent Trek series can be tied to the characters. Certainly that indefinable element called "chemistry" that the stars of the original enjoyed has never been reproduced, but consider the individual characters themselves:
Captain Kirk is a man of action and introspection, thoughtful but decisive (and willing to take full responsibility) about his mission orders. He prefers the peaceful solution but is always prepared for the alternatives. He leads his crews into any dangerous confrontation himself, and has earned their respect. Mr. Spock is a genius, well versed in multiple scientific fields, a strong and dependable friend even if he does exert an admirable self-control over his own feelings. Dr. McCoy's affected disdain for technology covers a brilliant medical mind, just as his care and concern for his patients is covered by his own brand of gruff sarcasm. Scotty is a brilliant engineer, Sulu a top expert at Conn and fire control... see the trend? These are all extremely competent people, well-trained and supremely capable.
This is a large part of how the original series crew captured the public's imagination. These are people we can look up to as role models, people we would want to work with, people we can believe could survive facing the undiscovered dangers out in the galaxy.
Of course, TV did some growing up during the decades following the 60's. Just as a pure black-hearted "evil for the sake of evil" villain was no longer believable (unless you're on a political talk show dissing the other party), so too has the 100% pure hero gone out of style. Today's audience expects more three-dimensional characters, shades of gray, and character flaws- even in our heroes.
This is where the latter series failed. While some rough edges and imperfect heroes make for more realistic stories, outright incompetence only works for farcical shows like Police Squad! On Voyager we could always expect Captain Janeway to fervently uphold or casually ignore the Prime Directive- whichever course would put her crew in the most danger. On Enterprise Captain Archer was a step closer to mental stability, but Archer's hobby of being beaten up and taken prisoner made it even harder for a likeable nice-guy actor like Bakula to project an aura of command.
Certainly the writing staff didn't help. For the action-adventure side of the story the crew tended to get into jeopardy every week. A thoughtful, professional writer can write his characters into danger without having them just do something stupid for danger's sake, but it is a lot easier to get into danger when the characters are too stupid to avoid it. "There's stuff blowing up in front of us... well, that's no reason to change course." "Scan the area we put down the landing party? Who do you think we are, 20 Century NASA?" "This video game keeps malfunctioning and trying to kill us- let's go in and play some more!"
Hopefully the producers of the next Trek adventure will realize where the franchise buried itself. We can have multi-layered, three-dimensional characters with a mix of good and bad character traits- just leave the suicidal stupidity out of the mix.
What has kept the original series going strong while the more modern versions have slipped (Next Generation into a series of less and less popular movies, and Voyager and Enterprise into ratings nosedives)? Many fans have (justifiably) pointed at the quality of the writing. The original series often had classic scripts, written (or at least inspired by) real science fiction authors. By the middle of Voyager they were buying their scripts in bulk from Spatial Anomalies 'R' Us.
While it's true the decade that saw the franchise finally dying (don't worry; it's just the temporary sort of death pioneered by Mr. Spock and Ensign Kim) produced scripts that inspired quite a few inventive variations of the word "suck," I think a more direct reason for the failures of the more recent Trek series can be tied to the characters. Certainly that indefinable element called "chemistry" that the stars of the original enjoyed has never been reproduced, but consider the individual characters themselves:
Captain Kirk is a man of action and introspection, thoughtful but decisive (and willing to take full responsibility) about his mission orders. He prefers the peaceful solution but is always prepared for the alternatives. He leads his crews into any dangerous confrontation himself, and has earned their respect. Mr. Spock is a genius, well versed in multiple scientific fields, a strong and dependable friend even if he does exert an admirable self-control over his own feelings. Dr. McCoy's affected disdain for technology covers a brilliant medical mind, just as his care and concern for his patients is covered by his own brand of gruff sarcasm. Scotty is a brilliant engineer, Sulu a top expert at Conn and fire control... see the trend? These are all extremely competent people, well-trained and supremely capable.
This is a large part of how the original series crew captured the public's imagination. These are people we can look up to as role models, people we would want to work with, people we can believe could survive facing the undiscovered dangers out in the galaxy.
Of course, TV did some growing up during the decades following the 60's. Just as a pure black-hearted "evil for the sake of evil" villain was no longer believable (unless you're on a political talk show dissing the other party), so too has the 100% pure hero gone out of style. Today's audience expects more three-dimensional characters, shades of gray, and character flaws- even in our heroes.
This is where the latter series failed. While some rough edges and imperfect heroes make for more realistic stories, outright incompetence only works for farcical shows like Police Squad! On Voyager we could always expect Captain Janeway to fervently uphold or casually ignore the Prime Directive- whichever course would put her crew in the most danger. On Enterprise Captain Archer was a step closer to mental stability, but Archer's hobby of being beaten up and taken prisoner made it even harder for a likeable nice-guy actor like Bakula to project an aura of command.
Certainly the writing staff didn't help. For the action-adventure side of the story the crew tended to get into jeopardy every week. A thoughtful, professional writer can write his characters into danger without having them just do something stupid for danger's sake, but it is a lot easier to get into danger when the characters are too stupid to avoid it. "There's stuff blowing up in front of us... well, that's no reason to change course." "Scan the area we put down the landing party? Who do you think we are, 20 Century NASA?" "This video game keeps malfunctioning and trying to kill us- let's go in and play some more!"
Hopefully the producers of the next Trek adventure will realize where the franchise buried itself. We can have multi-layered, three-dimensional characters with a mix of good and bad character traits- just leave the suicidal stupidity out of the mix.
