ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

"How William Shatner Changed the World"

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this May. 17 2010, 1:09 pm

Quote (Angrybearsfan @ May 17 2010, 12:47 am)
Kelsey Grammar would make an excellent Captain. ?He was great in that TNG episode (Morgan Bates). ?That episode made you want them to do more with that character in terms of TV. ?I could easily see him playing a wry and sophisticated Captain, maybe set it 200 years after TNG so you can do new things.

You aren't the first one to observe this! I'd like to have seen Grammar a regular in Trek as well. And he did look good in the uniform.

But I have to go with tish & duck on this one: Bak was only what the writers made Archer out to be: a team-player with a lot less ego than previous Captains. They hired him for his ability to portray an identifiable everyman, not a walking legend. They gave him very human faults from the outset, but also made us empathize with his wonder for exploration, since he personified Earth's huge learning arc at the beginning of human space exploration.

If you look at all the overt indications that Archer was meant to have that sort of character, you'd see that Bak's portrayal has a lot more integrity to it.

And duck was absolutely spot on with Bakula's ability to play to the ensemble, and bring together the sense of all the characters onscreen in a given scene. In that sense, he's very much a TV-actor's actor.

Having said, I'll be the first to admit that B/B's writing WAS often frustratingly inconsistent, leaving us wondering for a time until they decided "which way to go" with something. In Archer's case, we're on the one hand all the time being told by Daniels from the future what a big deal Archer's going to be to history (a HUGE writing mistake), while at the same time showing an ordinary person put into extra-ordinary circumstances, demanding that we wonder how WE'D react to such aliens and situations.

And hey, Mm! You NAILED your analysis of Shat's place in Trekdom, for better and worse. There WILL never be another Kirk. :)

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this May. 17 2010, 4:38 pm

Quote (Middleman @ May 16 2010, 1:43 pm)
No one can over act more than Shant (except for David Caruso ... maybe).

word

GalaxyClass14

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 396

Report this May. 17 2010, 4:46 pm

Quote (grigori @ May 16 2010, 2:09 pm)
But I have to go with tish & duck on this one: Bak was only what the writers made Archer out to be

agreed
with small codicil

in all the years i have watched his shows,
" i " had never seen
bakula perform in the
archer manner before.
always thought additional
coaching must have also
come from directors
and/or
producers

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this May. 17 2010, 10:13 pm

Quote (GalaxyClass14 @ May 17 2010, 4:46 pm)
Quote (grigori @ May 16 2010, 2:09 pm)
But I have to go with tish & duck on this one: Bak was only what the writers made Archer out to be

agreed
with small codicil

in all the years i have watched his shows,
" i " had never seen
bakula perform in the
archer manner before.
always thought additional
coaching must have also
come from directors
and/or
producers

Yeh, and I could almost "feel" the moments he struggled against the direction for Archer.

82AIRBORNE

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1335

Report this May. 19 2010, 4:31 pm

ONLY...SHATNER........couldhaveMADE...the Kirk....that we haveALL.......come to love.

Speak no ill.

Mr.Sulu, lay in a course for Starbase 11.

But, I did see the program on History Channel and did not get the impression that Shatner was throwing rocks at Enterprise. He was stating a sad fact that things were not going well with Trek. But my oh my, we lost Archer & company only to settle for that Boy's Own World techno effects alternate reality, lets destroy Vulcan abomination that I paid $20 bucks for at Sam's Club? I want that hour and a half of my life back. Instead of the suspense of Enterprise, the future will be filled with endless cliches and Larry the Cable Guy ( minus his charm ) jokes as we boldly go through the same old plots and did I mention that they destroyed Vulcan? Sacrilege.

Middleman

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3657

Report this May. 19 2010, 5:29 pm

Quote (82AIRBORNE @ May 19 2010, 4:31 pm)
Instead of the suspense of Enterprise, the future will be filled with endless cliches and Larry the Cable Guy ( minus his charm ) jokes as we boldly go through the same old plots and did I mention that they destroyed Vulcan? Sacrilege.

That was pretty good.

grigori

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 10463

Report this May. 19 2010, 9:50 pm

Quote (Middleman @ May 19 2010, 5:29 pm)
Quote (82AIRBORNE @ May 19 2010, 4:31 pm)
Instead of the suspense of Enterprise, the future will be filled with endless cliches and Larry the Cable Guy ( minus his charm ) jokes as we boldly go through the same old plots and did I mention that they destroyed Vulcan? Sacrilege.

That was pretty good.

:laugh: Yup. The film may have had entertainment value for the masses, but it was more like Muppet Babies in space than Trek. That includes the writers.

tishkajaku

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3908

Report this May. 20 2010, 12:51 am

Quote (82AIRBORNE @ May 19 2010, 3:31 pm)
ONLY...SHATNER........couldhaveMADE...the Kirk....that we haveALL.......come to love.

Speak no ill.

Mr.Sulu, lay in a course for Starbase 11.

But, I did see the program on History Channel and did not get the impression that Shatner was throwing rocks at Enterprise. He was stating a sad fact that things were not going well with Trek. But my oh my, we lost Archer & company only to settle for that Boy's Own World techno effects alternate reality, lets destroy Vulcan abomination that I paid $20 bucks for at Sam's Club? I want that hour and a half of my life back. Instead of the suspense of Enterprise, the future will be filled with endless cliches and Larry the Cable Guy ( minus his charm ) jokes as we boldly go through the same old plots and did I mention that they destroyed Vulcan? Sacrilege.

This is probably the BEST description I have read!  And I so agree with it!   :laugh:  :cool:

challengerdyer

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 887

Report this Jun. 12 2010, 2:21 pm

Exactly.

silvik123

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1245

Report this Jun. 17 2010, 10:34 pm

Quote (challengerdyer @ May 15 2010, 11:41 am)
So there was this show on History Channel or Discovery called "How William Shatner Changed the World" hosted by WS, and all about ST and the technology and innovations that it has inspired. ANYWAY, at the end of the show he is commenting on the decline of Star Trek's popularity and is referring to the spinoffs when he gets to post-Voyager......he says, "...and worse was to come." As he says this the opening title for ENTERPRISE appears on screen. ?WS comments that ENTERPRISE only lasted four seasons, and then he moves on to NEMESIS being a flop at the box office.


William Shatner does not say things he does not want to say. ?If we as fans have learned anything about WS it is that he controls every word that is written for him to say in whatever he does. ?I believe this whole-heartedly. ?I love WS for giving us Kirk, and for giving us HIS Kirk. But,....


We might all remember that B&B were trying HARD to get WS onto Star Trek: Enterprise in some form, and probably in an effort to save the show in the process. ?And for whatever reason they could not come up with an acceptable storyline or timeframe for WS to appear. ?I wonder now if that was really the case, or did WS just despise ST:E? ?Did he resent being upstaged as the "first" Captain?


I would think this line could have been written as: " Unfortunately, the news only got worse for the fourth spin-off Star Trek: Enterprise. ?With declining ratings, the show lasted only four seasons."

Not: "...and worse was to come." ?You also have to hear the WAY he says it, too. ?Maybe it's just me, I don't know, but this has always stuck in my craw and I finally had to post it and see what you thought about it.

Well, if that comment by him was truly his opinion... then I say it he was right on the button about that. Voyager was lame and worse was to come and "drum roll please" that was Enterprise. Enterprise and Nemesis pushed Star Trek off the cliff and is now trying to recover. I understand your upset about the comment because Enterprise is probably your favorite show (I'd be unhappy too if such a comment was said about my favorite trek), nevertheless it was disliked, even hated by many fans and whether you like it or not, Enterprise played quite a role in making star trek go downhill.

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum