September 10, 2004

  • Earlier this week, I rented season 1 of 'Star Trek.' It's been Trek-a-thon around here all week long, to the point that I'm sick of it. Earlier this evening, I finally had overload, and fell right over asleep while watching 'A Taste Of Armageddon,' which is actually a pretty good episode, taken in moderation.

    Woke up a couple hours ago and returned the DVD set in the night slot.

    Earlier this week, while I was enthusiastic, my impression was that Trek is a minor miracle. Just that it got made, and that they could show you all those special effects and fantastical sets, and have decent writing. The dedication to the concept was also outstanding; they went where they felt they needed to go, and the Trek universe was expanded to cover the gaps.

    Back when I was a little kid, I'd watch Star Trek obsessively. I wanted my real life to be as full of danger and intrigue as the Trek universe, where everyone seemed purposeful and decisions were hashed out in impassioned dialogue. I also related to Spock's detachment and Bones' passionate connection to life. Those were two sides of me that were really struggling to find expression, even as an 8 year old.

    As that obsessed 8 year old, I missed a lot of what was actually going on in the show. I think that's part of the success of the show; they were able to make it multi-layered enough to appeal to little kids who want to see planets explode, while also covering heavy topics. Today, even 8 year olds would see right through it, though. We're much more sophisticated about these things. Little kids have already seen planets explode, so what's the attraction?

    And there's something else that struck me... The whole cast overacts. This is a given. But they have to, or else the whole thing falls apart. There's a really great scene in 'The Man Trap' where Kirk is attacked by the salt vampire, which feeds off the salt in living creatures by sucking it out through their face somehow. So you begin with a shaky premise about a creature that lives on salt and gets it by attacking other living beings. Then you see these big ugly hands with suction cups all over, encircling Kirk's head. They're obviously fake hands. They don't even really move; they're not articulated. So what's an actor to do? How can he make the audience believe he's being attacked by these stupid hands? Scream, Shatner! Scream the most outrageously forced scream you can! No need to make it believable, since we're past that point already.

    The whole series is like that. It's balls-to-the-wall acting in broad strokes and grotesque form, which is exactly right for the show.

    But also hard to watch for a week straight.

Comments (5)

  • We're to used to great special effects and subtler acting now to watch the Enterprise shake without laughing. Still, it's an amazingly written show... I still love it, but not in mass quantities.

  • I used to watch Star Trek when I was a kid, but somehow I think it must have been a different Star Trek. I don't know how many there are now but I don't watch them any longer. Life goes on . . .

  • hi there. i don't like star trek, but i think it's okay that you do.

    sara

  • i've never seen an episode or a movie of star trek...... there's no explanation for it.

  • Always more of a Dr. Who fan here. I watched Trek but never really got into it even though I love/loved sci fi. Speaking of, I borrowed the first season of Space 1999 from a friend recently and my 8-year-old son really liked it. I was pretty surprised by that.

Comments are closed.

Post a Comment