The Basic Appeal Of The Old Star Trek Series Was
-
MikeF-6 — 12 years ago(May 18, 2013 11:32 AM)
That happened in, like, two (Mudd's Women & I, Mudd) of the 79 episodes of the Original Series.
The reason was its underlying picture of 60s United States, a critique of the social situation, and a vision of what a peaceful existence with diversity and racial tolerance could achieve. (I often wonder what conservatives realize they are saying about their own philosophy when they condemn these sentiments with liberal.)
mf
Theres anarchists over there, sir. And Atheists. And vegetarians, sir. Vegetarians! -
Owlwise — 11 years ago(June 12, 2014 03:34 PM)
This is it exactly. Whatever the technical advances & changes in TV storytelling since, however clunky or overly earnest parts of TOS can be after nearly 50 years, the fact remains that the stories were not only strong, they were actually about something. That's a quality many of the best shows from that time had: always thoroughly entertaining, if that's all you wanted; but also providing food for thought as well. They weren't escapism, but an allegorical way of deal with then-contemporary issues, minus the glib irony or chic nihilism that passes for in-depth storytelling in too many shows today.
-
amyghost — 11 years ago(June 13, 2014 03:57 AM)
That's a quality many of the best shows from that time had: always thoroughly entertaining, if that's all you wanted; but also providing food for thought as well. They weren't escapism, but an allegorical way of deal with then-contemporary issues, minus the glib irony or chic nihilism that passes for in-depth storytelling in too many shows today
That's very well-putin two sentences you've neatly summed up a major difference between the best of the older shows, and the supposedly 'hip' attitudinizing that takes the place of depth in a lot of modern-day series.
The best of older television programming displayed some genuine heart and concern for the human condition that's all too frequently absent from the glibness and irony you so correctly call out in contemporary television writing. -
LorqVonRay1999 — 2 years ago(October 21, 2023 04:24 PM)
I think conservatives would point to the fact liberals base just about everything on skin color.
And point out how a virulent strain of anti-Semitism easily crept into the liberal orthodoxy.
We have sitting members in Congress who are openly anti-Semites and who openly support terrorist groups whose mission is to eradicate Israel. They are, of course, Democrats. They knew Democrats would embrace anything for votes. -
larry-485-161583 — 12 years ago(November 26, 2013 04:42 AM)
I can't put my finger on the reason why I like the original series so much.
I just know that I've tried watching all the modern spin-offs and usually turn them off after five minutes.
The exception is when I turn them off after one minute. -
telegonus — 12 years ago(March 19, 2014 01:41 AM)
There's a lot of truth in what you say, Joe. I'd put it differently, maybe will later on, but yeah, the rerun popularity of
Star Trek
, its cult status at the James Bond-Sherlock Holmes level, is at least in part a strong identification factor with nerd or geek kids who were chronologically but not culturally in sync with the Woodstock generation, the Age Of Aquarius. But they had
Star Trek
, they had
Star Trek
, they had
Star Trek
, they couldn't get laid but they had
Star Trek
and the babes were in some cases bodacious.
!!