Ok, I wouldn't go that far at all. Perhaps at the time they were released, and for about 10 or 15 yrs after the show's cancellation in 69. Since that time, and with several decades of advanced technology, it becomes quite clear that while the individual characters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and also Scotty were well defined, the technology and the ideas during the 60's that were about space, other worlds, etc. seems in 2025 to be quite primitive.
But the orignal series wasn't really about technology or what the future would appear to be centuries from now; it was for the most part a character driven show in the same vein as Wagon Train, in fact Roddenberry himself stated that when he was attempting to sell NBC on the idea of picking up the show. "it's Wagon Train in space".
Observation: For a show that proports to be set a few centuries in the future and about seeking out other worlds and civilizations, they sure do spend an over amount of time back in 20th century Earth and the Nazis make appearances on a few episodes---as if nothing else of importance in Earth's history post 20th century occurred that the show could've explored. Nothing at all? Too many Nazis/WW2, 20th century Earth episodes and not enough Klingons and Romulans (especially since the latter two civilizations are actually in the same century as the Federation, and thus Kirk would've come into contact far more often than he would've personally witnessed Nazis/20th century Earth. This is basically now considered to be lazy writing on the screenwriters part--or pressure from the networks to keep doing episodes in current times at the expense of developing a clear 23rd century world view.
Earth ca.1967 looks nice, how about showing more episodes of civilizations set in Rigel 4 or Alpha 9 in 2284? But that would take some advanced writing as well as showing more technological advances, which perhaps the show's budget didn't allow for.
That's obviously a '60's bias of the writers, who for them, WW2 was the be and end all event of their lives. Basically the show's weakness was in its technology as well as its world view of other worlds post 20th century that the Federation encountered, on that point, looking at the show in 2025, it's very primitive indeed.
thankfully now in 2025 the technology for Sci Fi based films can run rings around 60's Star Trek, which again, focused more on its characters (it's strength) but at the expense of developing true post 20th century worlds and civilizations (it took Star Wars to give the 80's ST films some different ideas as to which directions to take their 23rd century based show)
Looked at it now, I'd say there are 25 excellent episodes, and the rest are middling, mediocre, severely dated, or basic crap (For example, the beloved Trouble with Tribbles, that's a bunch of junk).
The original Star Trek series had limited budgets, especially during season three. The communicators that they used are similar to the cell phones that would come along in the 90s. Many of the originals' story-lines were moralistic in the 60s liberalism sense. Today, the original series would be considered sexist as Gene Roddenberry was a sexist. Many of the outfits of the actresses were very revealing of the fair sex's curves.
Ironically that's part of the major original appeal of the show, showing scantilly clad female guests and sometimes the stars themselves. After all, there were far better black actresses that Roddenberry could've cast as opposed to Nichelle Nichols (at best was a wooden mediocre actress, she wasn't all that, esp. when contrasted with Diahann Carroll or Gail Fisher, but both actresses weren't viewed as sexy or hot, as i would suppose that Nichols was.
Yes the story lines echoed mid century liberal humanism values, which viewed from today comes across as dated naive and out of touch with reality.
The technology viewed from today is primitive. And this is supposed to be set in the 23rd century. Technology wise, it's a step above the sci-fi serials from the late 30's, but not by much. Just has a better production gloss.
70's SNL's skit of ST's final episode before network cancellation done by the awesome John Belushi, Akroyd, Chase is a real treat. The technology props used in SNL skit aren't much behind the actual technology shown in the actual show. So that's how dated both views are from 2025.
It's definitely a good episode. I prefer "Mirror Mirror" as well as "Bread and Circuses" and also the sometimes overlooked "All Our Yesterdays".
Yeah, that original Star Trek series had about thirty very good episodes, thirty pretty decent episodes and about twenty that were eh.
Ok, I wouldn't go that far at all. Perhaps at the time they were released, and for about 10 or 15 yrs after the show's cancellation in 69. Since that time, and with several decades of advanced technology, it becomes quite clear that while the individual characters of Kirk, Spock, McCoy and also Scotty were well defined, the technology and the ideas during the 60's that were about space, other worlds, etc. seems in 2025 to be quite primitive.
But the orignal series wasn't really about technology or what the future would appear to be centuries from now; it was for the most part a character driven show in the same vein as Wagon Train, in fact Roddenberry himself stated that when he was attempting to sell NBC on the idea of picking up the show. "it's Wagon Train in space".
Observation: For a show that proports to be set a few centuries in the future and about seeking out other worlds and civilizations, they sure do spend an over amount of time back in 20th century Earth and the Nazis make appearances on a few episodes---as if nothing else of importance in Earth's history post 20th century occurred that the show could've explored. Nothing at all? Too many Nazis/WW2, 20th century Earth episodes and not enough Klingons and Romulans (especially since the latter two civilizations are actually in the same century as the Federation, and thus Kirk would've come into contact far more often than he would've personally witnessed Nazis/20th century Earth. This is basically now considered to be lazy writing on the screenwriters part--or pressure from the networks to keep doing episodes in current times at the expense of developing a clear 23rd century world view.
Earth ca.1967 looks nice, how about showing more episodes of civilizations set in Rigel 4 or Alpha 9 in 2284? But that would take some advanced writing as well as showing more technological advances, which perhaps the show's budget didn't allow for.
That's obviously a '60's bias of the writers, who for them, WW2 was the be and end all event of their lives. Basically the show's weakness was in its technology as well as its world view of other worlds post 20th century that the Federation encountered, on that point, looking at the show in 2025, it's very primitive indeed.
thankfully now in 2025 the technology for Sci Fi based films can run rings around 60's Star Trek, which again, focused more on its characters (it's strength) but at the expense of developing true post 20th century worlds and civilizations (it took Star Wars to give the 80's ST films some different ideas as to which directions to take their 23rd century based show)
Looked at it now, I'd say there are 25 excellent episodes, and the rest are middling, mediocre, severely dated, or basic crap (For example, the beloved Trouble with Tribbles, that's a bunch of junk).
Set in 2084 on Rigel 4 or Gallus 6?
I'd say about 25 excellent episodes, while the rest are mediocre and dated crap.
The original Star Trek series had limited budgets, especially during season three. The communicators that they used are similar to the cell phones that would come along in the 90s. Many of the originals' story-lines were moralistic in the 60s liberalism sense. Today, the original series would be considered sexist as Gene Roddenberry was a sexist. Many of the outfits of the actresses were very revealing of the fair sex's curves.
Ironically that's part of the major original appeal of the show, showing scantilly clad female guests and sometimes the stars themselves. After all, there were far better black actresses that Roddenberry could've cast as opposed to Nichelle Nichols (at best was a wooden mediocre actress, she wasn't all that, esp. when contrasted with Diahann Carroll or Gail Fisher, but both actresses weren't viewed as sexy or hot, as i would suppose that Nichols was.
Yes the story lines echoed mid century liberal humanism values, which viewed from today comes across as dated naive and out of touch with reality.
The technology viewed from today is primitive. And this is supposed to be set in the 23rd century. Technology wise, it's a step above the sci-fi serials from the late 30's, but not by much. Just has a better production gloss.
70's SNL's skit of ST's final episode before network cancellation done by the awesome John Belushi, Akroyd, Chase is a real treat. The technology props used in SNL skit aren't much behind the actual technology shown in the actual show. So that's how dated both views are from 2025.
Just saw the Saturday Night Live skit a few weeks ago. Hilarious.
Yep, and the technology presented in the skit isn't much behind that that was shown on 60's show.
Regarding space, other worlds, and especially technology, Star Wars 77 was a real game changer, even on ST.