From the beginning, Roddenberry wanted the show [Star Trek] to be allegorical, dealing with real-world problems and the struggles of civilization. In the original series, he very consciously wanted Kirk to represent John F. Kennedy and his “New Frontier”; Spock to be the good Roman Stoic and republican; and Leonard “Bones” McCoy to be a (no joke!) H.L. Mencken. In the first five-year mission of the Enterprise, the ship would explore the farthest reaches of known space, barely scratching the surface of the immense complexities of the galaxy. The stories worked best when Kirk stood for willful impulse; Spock for aristocratic reason; and Bones for democratic passions. From the beginning, Roddenberry attracted some of the best writing talent available, including Ray Bradbury, Isaac Asimov, and Harlan Ellison.Bradley J. Birzer, Star Trek: Fifty Years Later
Showing posts with label Star Trek. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Star Trek. Show all posts
5/8/17
1/15/13
"Most people think of the plot as the most important facet of a story. In my opinion, character is usually the key to its success or failure. This holds true even for popular commercial writing, or even for a TV show. I have found that I can predict the commercial failure or success of a new TV series simply by evaluating the effectiveness of the characters. . . . The successful TV shows--think of "I Love Lucy," "MASH," "Star Trek," "The Cosby Show"--manage to portray characters who seem unique, likeable, and engaging. . . . The success of these programs is not because of their plots, which are often minimal or predictable....
The networks often miss this point. After they canceled "Star Trek," they decided to do an even bigger science fiction series. They gave the show a much bigger budget and the latest technology in special effects. The result? "Battlestar Galactica." The special effects were much better than "Star Trek's," the conception much more grandiose--and yet the characters simply did not work. ... The secret of "Star Trek" was not its special effects nor its science-fiction premise but the chemistry between the characters (the ultra-rational Spock, the folksy Dr. McCoy, and the shrewd pragmatist Captain Kirk), aided by some imaginatively written scripts.
Special effects, car chases, explosions, murders, and suspense can never salvage a story when nobody cares about the characters."
--Gene Veith, Reading Between the Lines
The networks often miss this point. After they canceled "Star Trek," they decided to do an even bigger science fiction series. They gave the show a much bigger budget and the latest technology in special effects. The result? "Battlestar Galactica." The special effects were much better than "Star Trek's," the conception much more grandiose--and yet the characters simply did not work. ... The secret of "Star Trek" was not its special effects nor its science-fiction premise but the chemistry between the characters (the ultra-rational Spock, the folksy Dr. McCoy, and the shrewd pragmatist Captain Kirk), aided by some imaginatively written scripts.
Special effects, car chases, explosions, murders, and suspense can never salvage a story when nobody cares about the characters."
--Gene Veith, Reading Between the Lines
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)