Scott Atwell Star Trek Discussion thread (Series and Films) (1 Viewer)

[jayembee]

I bailed on the animated series after 3 or 4 episodes when it originally aired. Then and now, I have issues with the animation (Filmation in general - all their stuff looks cheap) and the "phoned in" sound of the majority of the dialog, especially from Shatner. In spite of that I own DVD & BR copies of the series but rarely watch them (even less frequently than TNG, my least favorite of the Roddenberry series).

Like others, I'm not a fan of Filmation. I've only seen a small handful of the TAS episodes. The only one I made a point of watching was "The Slaver Weapon", and that's because I was a big fan of Larry Niven's Known Space series.

 

[ScottRE]

I love it. A lot of the stories are solid and even if the animation is limited, the art is lovely. The fidelity towards the original series is incredible, with recreated camera angles to make it closer to the original series.

I even love the Ray Ellis music.

It is one of the better put together Filmation shows of their day. Compared to Journey to the Center of the Earth and Fantastic Voyage, it's practically a Fleischer production. Only their original Batman series looked as good.

The voice acting is the real downside since they never seemed to do retakes and I feel like Shatner and Nimoy only agreed to do it as long as they weren't completely inconvenienced. I know they followed the two of them around from place to place as they did stage work and guest shots, just trying to record them when they could get them into a recording studio. So these were pretty much "one and done" performances and other than the first couple of episodes, they were never all together, so the chemistry is gone. Famously, the kid who played young Spock in Yesteryear wasn't actually doing a finished performance but an audition. It shows.

As far as animation, all TV animation sucked then. Hannah Barbera and Rankin Bass weren't doing much better on Saturday Mornings and H-B's shows were mostly pretty grotesque. Their style for, say, The Funky Phantom was pretty ugly. Filmation sacrificed full animation for more believable character renderings and impeccably painted planetscapes. Hell, they could do aliens the original series and many of the pre CGI series could only dream of.

But I totally get it if you didn't grow up with it. If you were older than a late teenager when you first saw it back then, it's probably pretty intolerable. I was like 5 or 6 when NBC ran it and I fell in love with it. There are pictures of me as a kid posing in that "Kirk runs towards the camera" stance Filmation used often.

For all of its limitations and faults, TAS is still Star Trek with the original cast, some of the original writers and produced mostly by Roddenberry and Dorothy Fontana. Forget Lower Decks (and I would love to), this is the only Animated Star Trek that I enjoy.

 

[Nelson Au]

Scott, I appreciate the enthusiasm! I also watched it as a kid. As an already developing Star Trek fan then, it was cool to see more Star Trek.

 

[Osato]

Really enjoying the center seat documentary on prime. I just watched the Episode on the enterprise tv series and end of Berman years. Insightful!

The Center Seat: 55 Years of Star Trek

The Center Seat: 55 Years Of Star Trek is an eleven-part documentary series produced by The Nacelle Company for first-time streaming by History Vault (the paid streaming service of The History Channel) through Prime Video (on whose Amazon.com mother site episodes also became available for...

memory-alpha.fandom.com

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Really enjoying the center seat documentary on prime. I just watched the Episode on the enterprise tv series and end of Berman years. Insightful!

The Center Seat: 55 Years of Star Trek

The Center Seat: 55 Years Of Star Trek is an eleven-part documentary series produced by The Nacelle Company for first-time streaming by History Vault (the paid streaming service of The History Channel) through Prime Video (on whose Amazon.com mother site episodes also became available for...

memory-alpha.fandom.com

I liked it too!

The Center Seat: 55 Years Of Star Trek DVD Review

The Center Seat: 55 Years of Star Trek may not appeal to every single Trek viewer. If you’ve never been to a Star Trek convention...

www.hometheaterforum.com

 

[Harry-N]

We ploughed through that documentary sometime last year, I think. I know it didn't take us long to get through it.

As one who was there from the first NBC Peacock of STAR TREK, 'and' who was a young adult for the animated series, I was both happy and a bit dismayed with the animated series. It certainly felt cheap, and the animation left a lot to be desired - 'but' it was STAR TREK. I think my biggest problem was the sparse number of episodes. It was a hassle to tune in on Saturday morning for me at the time, but it seemed that every time I did, they were showing "The Infinite Vulcan", not one of my favorites.

I also never liked "The Slaver Weapon" that many seem to rave about. Probably because I was unfamiliar with Larry Niven - and still am to this day.

But it was the seventies, and it was the only new STAR TREK we had as those old familiar 79 episodes kept running in syndication.

I purchased the animated series on DVD, but decided I didn't need the Blu-rays.

As for LOWER DECKS, I haven't been watching most of the episodes. I sampled the first couple and found the dialog to be way too fast to appreciate or even understand. Even captioning goes by too quickly to read! But I do find it humorous when I do attempt to stick with an episode. I find it easier to watch on the computer with headphones than on the TV. Someday I may attempt a full watch of LOWER DECKS.

 

[Jason_V]

If podcasts are your thing, there is a fun "after show" podcast for The Center Seat. I never watched the doc, but the 'cast entertained me for a weekend.

 

[Nelson Au]

I totally forgot about the Center Seat documentary. I have it on my to-watch pile. As it’s a long weekend, maybe I can fit in a viewing.

 

[Osato]

If podcasts are your thing, there is a fun "after show" podcast for The Center Seat. I never watched the doc, but the 'cast entertained me for a weekend.

Found it!

 

[Nelson Au]

Guys, I had DecadesTV on this morning where they are doing a Sally Field binge and showing The Flying Nun currently. There was an episode on where a Star Trek guest actor appears in a major guest role. It was Carl Byrd, who was the red shirt Lt Shea in By Any Other Name. It was such a contrast as he had a bigger role and was playing a character compared to his small role on Star Trek. It’s always interesting to see things like this.

 

[KPmusmag]

Guys, I had DecadesTV on this morning where they are doing a Sally Field binge and showing The Flying Nun currently. There was an episode on where a Star Trek guest actor appears in a major guest role. It was Carl Byrd, who was the red shirt Lt Shea in By Any Other Name. It was such a contrast as he had a bigger role and was playing a character compared to his small role on Star Trek. It’s always interesting to see things like this.

Also in Flying Nun, in the Christmas episode Celia Lovsky plays an aged nun who wishes it could snow in Puerto Rico (which, of course, Sister Bertrille manages to accomplish for her). Quite a departure from T'Pau in Amok Time.

 

[ScottRE]

The 60's were an amazing time for the guest star circuit, especially character actors. The more shows from the era you see, the more familiar these folks get. While some actors get more meaty roles than they did on Star Trek, the women usually look most beautiful on Trek.

When my TV interest was narrower than it is now, many actors were mostly pegged by me as "Kelso from Star Trek" or "Victor from Space:1999." At some point, television in general interested me and it's fun to see just how SMALL a role those characters were in their careers. Especially if you get into the ITC catalogue. So many actors who became known for 1999 and UFO were on a dozen other shows around the same time.

 

[Nelson Au]

Kevin, Scott, I just caught Sandra Smith on The Flying Nun and Michael Pataki as semi regular comic foil side kick to Alejandro Rey,

Yes, the more 1960’s shows I re-visit, the more I recognize so many actors doing the circuit.

i know I’ve been a bit off-topic with my posts about the guest actors. Thanks for putting up with me.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

i know I’ve been a bit off-topic with my posts about the guest actors. Thanks for putting up with me.

I think it’s a worthwhile detour because it gives a great deal of context to the era in which TOS was made. And like you, I have an affinity for all of those performers - I always enjoy seeing TOS guest stars appearing in other shows and getting to see different examples of their talents.

 

[Nelson Au]

Thanks Josh!

It’s certainly interesting to see Michael Pataki in a comedic role when his two Star Trek roles were as heavies.

 

[Wiseguy]

They could take the soundtracks of the animated series and use modern animation to make it very realistpic looking. The stories overall are really good IMO, but I do find the Filmation style distracting.

And correct the mistakes like McCoy in gold uniform, Nurse Chapel in red and one shot of someone's arm in a different color than the rest of the uniform.

 

[TJPC]

And correct the mistakes like McCoy in gold uniform, Nurse Chapel in red and one shot of someone's arm in a different color than the rest of the uniform.

One has to face facts that despite having the voices of some of the original actors and some good writing, what you basically have is cheap Saturday morning crap made to sell Post and Kelloge products to children, while they play with their cars on the floor in front of the TV.

 

[ScottRE]

Well, the real fact is that all TV animation of the era was cheap and limited. The difference was always content. Nobody watched The Flintstones for the awesome animation. The characters and situations made it a success. So sure, remove the actors and stories from Animated Star Trek is it's potentially crap. But you're removing what makes it more successful than the average Saturday morning TV show. Remember it did win a daytime Emmy award,.

Television is a moneymaking platform. Even The Twilight Zone existed at the whim of sponsors and sure those commercials were hypnotic. I bugged my parents for everything. But there is an obvious difference between animated shows like Captain Caveman and Star Trek. All TV animation of the era was cheap, but the content made it different. Star Trek aimed higher. It was cheap but it was well crafted for the most part.

 

[jayembee]

I disagree. Compared to today's animation, sure, pretty much everything back in the day is not going to look great. Hanna Barbera is no Pixar. But even back then, Hanna Barbera was certainly better than Filmation. And miles better than Cambria, who did Clutch Cargo and Space Angel (the latter of which I loved, but the animation still sucked big time).

 

[ScottRE]

It was a trade-off. Hanna-Barbera didn't specialize in realistic human characters, at least not past 1970. Everybody was somehow exaggerated or simplified or made more cartoony. But they also went by the same houses and rocks and mountains as they drove and ran by. They reused backgrounds continuously.

Filmation had much prettier background art and more realistic human characters. The movements were smoother and they frequently employed rotoscoping. When they really took the time to do it, they were some of the best TV animation of the day. Look at their Flash Gordon series or Tarzan.

Admittedly, they did do some crap. A lot of their early stuff is terrible.