From: "Mark Meskin" (plastic.gravity@new44rock.com) Subject: Space1999: OT-Vger Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 12:00:28 -0600 I found this in the entertainment news........ Kate Mulgrew, who plays Capt. Kathryn Janeway on UPN's "Star Trek: Voyager" wants to leave the series at the end of the season. Mulgrew met reporters during a series of informal sessions at the TCA Winter Press Tour in Pasadena, Friday. While Mulgrew said she enjoyed working on the show, and praised her costars (with the notable exception of Jeri Ryan), Mulgrew left no doubt to those in attendance that she was leaving the series at the end of the current season. Tom Nunan, President of Entertainment for UPN, had no comment about Mulgrew's comments, though Dean Valentine, CEO and President of UPN, said in a separate session the chances were "very fine that it(voyager) will be back next year." Perhaps there is hope for Voyager yet? If we only could convince her to take Brannon Bragga, and half the writers with her when she leaves.............. -Mark
From: "Neil Strawbridge" (strawbridge@home4tag.com) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 17:03:10 -0500 I heard about this in early December, as well. It's probably true. In a way, it's kind of sad that the only Star Trek to feature a woman in the captain's chair will also be the only Star Trek whose lead actor quit the series. Here's a review of main characters/actors who have left the various Star Treks over the years... Grace Lee Whitney as Yeoman Janice Rand (although not by choice, she had problems which kept her from fulfilling her obligations as an actress), TOS Denise Crosby as Tasha Yar, TNG Wil Wheaton as Wesley Crusher, TNG Terry Farrell as Lt. Jadzia Dax, DS9 I personally find it interesting that women and children have been the ones to leave. This is especially considering that Star Trek has, in the past, been accused of being an "all boys club." Yet the one time a woman is given the center seat and a starring role, she quits. Don't get me wrong, this is not a slam against women. On the contrary. Although I'm not a big fan of Kate Mulgrew or Captain Janeway, I wish KM would stay put just for the principle of the thing. First and foremost, she demonstrates that a woman *can* achieve a position of power on her own merits. The problem with Janeway is that she was never developed enough as a character. I've been watching Voyager for five seasons, yet I still don't feel like I know who Janeway is. The overall problem with the show itself is that there is nothing about it which makes the viewer think "I'd like to live in that world" or "I'd like to be there." And THAT, my friends, is the magic of a TV show... when it draws you into it to the point that you WANT to visit each week. -Neil
From: "Mark Meskin" (plastic.gravity@new44rock.com) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 16:19:24 -0600 > In a way, it's kind of sad that the only Star Trek to feature a woman in the > captain's chair will also be the only Star Trek whose lead actor quit the > series. I agree with that. But I have to stand back a minute and look at two things I think are influencing her decision: 1)Kate Mulgrew is a good actress, but a mediocre StarFleet Captain. She also seems a bit pompous at times(the actress, not the character) 2)Her Character now resides in the shadow of 7of9(and her big boobs, which I'm surprised havn't knocked anyone out yet)...many of the story lines have 7 saving the poor helpless StarFleet fools. I can't say I blame her for wanting to leave with that kind of writing. [SNIP] And the little "Efl" girl played Kes.....who left Vger due to uh...chemical dependency problems > I personally find it interesting that women and children have been the ones > to leave. This is especially considering that Star Trek has, in the past, > been accused of being an "all boys club." Yet the one time a woman is given > the center seat and a starring role, she quits. This is a universal theme is Sci-Fi(at least on TV), but also, I agree its sad that she just "quits". >I've been watching Voyager for five seasons, yet I still don't > feel like I know who Janeway is. THe writing is so bad, when we watch, we rip it apart for fun. > The overall problem with the show itself is that there is nothing about it > which makes the viewer think "I'd like to live in that world" or "I'd like > to be there." And THAT, my friends, is the magic of a TV show... when it > draws you into it to the point that you WANT to visit each week. Yes, Exactly. In Space:1999, despite all the BS and stuff they went through, it(Alpha) was always a fascinating and fully realized world that any viewer would want to visit. -Mark
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 03:32:35 -0800 (PST) From: Paulo Jorge Vaz Pereira (starblade@rocket44mail.com) Subject: Space1999: OT-Vger I also have read that. But my surprise was to read that she is an actress from Theatre. How can anyone that has the theatre school act like that? This reminds me a play I saw some years ago with Leonard Nemoy (Spock) in the role of Vicent Van Gogh. I was surprised with his performance. A little exaggerated sometimes, but it was very good. It had nothing to do with the kind of acting that he was doing in ST. Perhaps there's a strange virus running in ST:Any Generation that prevents them to act properly. At least Landau, Bain and Barry Morse had already an established name on the market, not to mention that the rest of the actores were ok (I wish they had never get rid of Paul Morrow, his performance in The last Sunset was very good and his hot head attitudes really made him a second Koenig). Captain Freeway was one of the reasons why I had stopped seeing ST:Voyeur some weeks ago. The others are that the problem of the week is always solved using the technocrap of the week; the *quality* of the scripts; the Virtual Doctor; the lame romance between Asterix and some girl and the holodeck stuff. Not to mention that they are always the same actors doing the same old thing. Where's the rest of the crew? Yeah... and I also get tired of hearing Captain Freeway saying "On screen" *every* time a communication arrived. That was really getting on my nerves. Paulo Pereira
From: "Petter Ogland" (petter.ogland@dnmi4tag.no) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 12:32:18 +0000 Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger > At least Landau, Bain and Barry Morse had already an established > name on the market, not to mention that the rest of the actores > were ok (I wish they had never get rid of Paul Morrow, his performance > in The last Sunset was very good and his hot head attitudes really made > him a second Koenig). Definitely, yes. While not being all that impressed by the general acting efforts in MISSION:IMPOSSIBLE, the first season shot back to back with the first season of STAR TREK, at least Landau seemed to be enjoying his role and making the best out of it. Barbara Bain received Emmys for her contribution, but I suspect that had more to do with face value and politics. Landau is a much more capable actor in my opinion. It was eviden then, and perhaps even more now after he received the Oscar for ED WOOD. Barbara Bain is a bit more uneven, I think, but in many episodes of MISSION:IMPOSSIBLE she did nicely, and to a much greater extent with her much more complex and interesting character in the first season of SPACE:1999. She was also a bit uneven here, the way I see it at least, DEATH'S OTHER DOMINION being a particulary weak episode, and going completely wrong in redefining Helena in DRAGON'S DOMAIN, but, on the other hand, in some of the episodes that were obviosly interesting in terms of understanding and developing Helena, such as BREAKAWAY, MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, BLACK SUN (perhaps), and definitely RING AROUND THE MOON, she more than compensated for a role that was often underwritten. In agreement with Paulo, Martin Landau was very impressive indeed through all of Year One, I think, and even did fairly well during the second half of the series which was generally characterised by much weaker dialogue and scripts for the main participants than the early episodes. In the case of Barry Morse this is even more evident, I think. Morse did an outstanding job of giving life to Victor in episodes like MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH, BLACK SUN and RING AROUND THE MOON, but by the time of MISSION OF THE DARIANS, INFERNAL MACHINE, DRAGON'S DOMAIN and so on it seems quite evident that he is fed up with delivering the same kind of nonsense feedback to Landau and Bain. Quite sad really, that he was not used in a more interesting way, but then again, we always have RING AROUND THE MOON and other early classics if we really want to commemorate what SPACE:1999 was like at its very best, in terms of actor achiements, writing and production. As Paulo says, it is also a bit sad that Paul Morrow was not developed more. THE LAST SUNSET is very much his episode, however, just like DRAGON'S DOMAIN was to be Alan Carter's episode, I believe. After my recent discussions about DRAGON'S DOMAIN with Mark, I spent another night watching it, thinking what it might had looked like if we had Alan Carter in the situation of Tony Cellini. I don't think it was only Nick Tate that was dissapointed that it didn't work out this way, but thinking in these terms, and comparing with what the Captain Carter character was like in the early episodes like BREAKAWAY and RING AROUND THE MOON, a rather aggressive little person that must have been a pain in the neck for Koenig, we have to be content with just thinking of the unfulfilled potentials of the show and be happy with the first episodes of SPACE:1999 that really defined the show and made the best out of the premises before ITC New York and RAI took over too much of the control. Petter
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 11:28:01 -0600 (CST) From: TIMOTHY GUEGUEN (ad058@sfn.saskatoon4tag.sk.ca) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Well, I'm sure you've heard complaints and criticisms of William Shatner's acting skills. Yet he also got his start as a stage actor in Montreal back in the '50s. tim gueguen 101867
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:15:43 -0800 (PST) From: Paulo Jorge Vaz Pereira (starblade@rocket44mail.com) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Well, that seem to confirm that they all fail in ST for one reason or the other. Perhaps the plots are so thin that cannot hide some poor acting. I'm used to see a lot of theatre in my country and I know that an actor with the theatre school tends to be a good one. The one that really had an outstanding performance in ST was not a regular one: Khan from the 2nd ST movie. From what I know Shatner never got much chances outside ST. At least Martin Landau got some decent roles, although some were pathetic like Dr. Piss-on-the-Wall on the "Eeeech Files: Fight this Feature". Paulo Pereira
From: relax@video44tron.ca Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 13:31:51 -0500 Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger > >From what I know Shatner never got much chances outside ST. 2 main reasons : - He's from Quebec. - He wears an hairpiece. Andre Beauchamp
From: "Atomic Possum" (atomicpossum@planetstl4tag.com) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 12:38:04 -0600 >Well, I'm sure you've heard complaints and criticisms of William Shatner's >acting skills. Yet he also got his start as a stage actor in Montreal >back in the '50s. I think that a great amount of this is a contemporary revisionism--the styles of acting and drama used in the 1960's is far different from that used now--Back then, things were much broader, much more purely dramatic. Nowadays things are heavily UNDERplayed--characters must be 'real,' like people we meet every day. Frankly, I think Shatner was wonderful as Kirk, a character that was somewhat larger-than-life. I think he began to get 'hammy' in the years following (in the movies, which have tended to form people's opinions), as he got older (and obviously didn't want to admit that) and as tastes changed. As for Nimoy, go back and watch the NEXT GENERATION epsiode "Reunification," where Spock appears. Frankly, as I see it, Nimoy raised the acting stakes so high in these episodes he reveals what shallow, dimensionless performances the NEXTGEN cast have been giving. His character is nuanced, subtle, while the regular cast are faces in suits moving around in front of scenery. Jon "Mr. Wonderful" Stadter
From: "Mark Meskin" (plastic.gravity@new44rock.com) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 21:31:10 -0600 > I think that a great amount of this is a contemporary revisionism--the > styles of acting and drama used in the 1960's is far different from that > used now--Back then, things were much broader, much more purely dramatic. > Nowadays things are heavily UNDERplayed--characters must be 'real,' like > people we meet every day. I don't know if its fair to call it revisionism. At the time, Shatners "over the top" acting and gregarious demeanor were a reflection of the times, if you ask me. I think we as a nation were more assurred of ourselves in the 50s and 60s(although by the late 60's this was changing). Things were black and white, good vs. evil, we knew who our enemy was, we felt we knew exactly how to handle things. By the mid 80s, things had changed a lot. Shades of gray would be a good description for the era of NextGen. > Frankly, I think Shatner was wonderful as Kirk, a character that was > somewhat larger-than-life. I think he began to get 'hammy' in the years > following (in the movies, which have tended to form people's opinions), as > he got older (and obviously didn't want to admit that) and as tastes > changed. I'll grant that. He had his shit together the first 2 seasons of Trek, 3rd was so-so, and in STTMP I think he turned a very good(if reserved) performance as Kirk. STTWOK introduced us to Holiday Ham Kirk.....he was much better in ST:3, a ham again in the next 2 movies, OK to slightly honey dipped in six, and pure Ham FAT in Generations. > As for Nimoy, go back and watch the NEXT GENERATION epsiode > "Reunification," where Spock appears. Frankly, as I see it, Nimoy raised > the acting stakes so high in these episodes he reveals what shallow, > dimensionless performances the NEXTGEN cast have been giving. His character > is nuanced, subtle, while the regular cast are faces in suits moving around > in front of scenery. I can't say I call his mumbling of lines, and sheepish gestures "nuanced". I think he looked very uncomfortable in those episodes. His performance as Spock was always very reserved and subtle in Trek, and at least to me, dead on. He certainly didn't chew the scenery. But in Reunification, he sure bumped into it a lot........... -Mark
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 23:11:15 -0500 From: actingman-jc@Worldnet.att4tag.net Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger >Grace Lee Whitney as Yeoman Janice Rand (although not by choice, she had >problems which kept her from fulfilling her obligations as an actress), TOS Although Whitney has been doing good by speaking about her addictions to help others, another sad fact is that documents in the Roddenberry archive say she was fired because her credits commanded her too much of a salary...they could easily bring in cheaper actresses when needed. Nothing about instability interfering with the job.
From: "Petter Ogland" (petter.ogland@dnmi4tag.no) Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 08:51:44 +0000 Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger > ... At the time, Shatners > "over the top" acting and gregarious demeanor were a reflection of the > times, if you ask me. I think we as a nation were more assurred of > ourselves in the 50s and 60s(although by the late 60's this was changing). > Things were black and white, good vs. evil, we knew who our enemy was, we > felt we knew exactly how to handle things. By the mid 80s, things had > changed a lot. Shades of gray would be a good description for the era of > NextGen. The contrast between the first series of SPACE:1999 and STAR TREK is rather striking, isn't it? While good vs. evil and other simplistic ethics may be one way of looking at it, VOYAGER'S RETURN and MISSION OF THE DARIANS present a very different picture, Ernst Queller "paving the road to hell with good intentions" and the Darians wanting to save not themselves but their cultural heritage and moral values for future generations. In the world of SPACE:1999 there was very little pure evil, I think. Even a psycho like Balor was explained in a fairly sympathetic manner, being the result of science and progress, a person not all that different to Queller, but who turned aggressive where Queller turned passive. SPACE:1999 was in some ways the anti-thesis to STAR TREK, I think, at least the first series, which was, of course, modelled heavily on 2001:A SPACE ODYSSEY and developing themes from UFO further, neither of these having all that much to do with STAR TREK really. Petter
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:22:00 -0800 (PST) From: Paulo Jorge Vaz Pereira (starblade@rocket44mail.com) Subject: Space1999: OT-Vger > I think that a great amount of this is a contemporary > revisionism--the styles of acting and drama used in the 1960's > is far different from that used now--Back then, things were > much broader, much more purely dramatic. > Nowadays things are heavily UNDERplayed--characters must be > 'real,' like people we meet every day. Part of what you say is true, part is not. You can see great TV or cinema performances no matter the date they were made. I agree that the bases for what is considered a good performance are changing every 10 years or so, but that's not a good excuse for poor acting. Even today Citizen Kane (1940) is hailed not only as the best movie ever, but also Orson Wells as a great actor on that movie -and he had both theather and radio schools- That's almost 30 *before* Tiberius Kirk. And have you ever saw Dr. Strangelove ? The triple role of Petter Sellers is a must (date? Early 60?). What about 1935 (!!!) "Gone with the Wind" ? Still is a classical today. What about Grace Kelly in any black & white Hitchcock movies? If you want to see her on a great role try "Vertigo". How many years before ST ? Also let us not forget the movie "In Cold Blood" in B&W too (based on a Truman Capote novel that was forbidden in the USA), the performance of one of the main characters is really good. Perhaps more than the actor itself was his role that is responsable for his good acting but no matter, it's still a good performance. And the wonderfull performance of everybody in "Once upon a time in the west" (1968), the same year that ST. Not to mention the acting in "The Shining" (1973?) only a couple of years after ST. And if we want go back even more there's a wonderfull film called "The Passion of Joana D'arc" (1928?) that is truly a masterpiece in terms of acting by the main actress. I only saw it once but I had never forget it so good it was. Sadly it's one of the few mention here that I don't own (along with Kane). That's why I say that we have outstanding performances in every decade, even if we consider that the base for judging what is good acting or not is always changing. It's not our (our=viewers) fault that William Shatner's acting look too 60's or Captain Freeway too plastic. Paulo Pereira
From: Paulo Jorge Morgado (paulo.morgado@rtc4tag.pt) Subject: RE: Space1999: OT-Vger / VERTIGO Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 20:28:58 -0000 > What about Grace Kelly in any black & white Hitchcock movies? > If you want to see her on a great role try "Vertigo". How many > years before ST ? Actually, It was Kim Novak in Vertigo - Mellanie Griffith's mother. Perhaps they'll make a Psycho-like remake using her... Paulo morgado
From: "Mark Meskin" (plastic.gravity@new44rock.com) Subject: Re: Space1999: OT-Vger Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 18:06:34 -0600 Congratulations Petter. You managed to find an interesting tack to that discussion without mentioning Ring around the Moon. Somehow, I find your posts more logical and enjoyeable when you don't sing about RATM...... Heres to more like this. -Mark