Star Trek: Strange new worlds

[Lazerlike42]

Personally, I don't see it. For example, if you compare the Spock of those films to some of the TOS Spock where he was in more of a "raw" state - e.g., This Side of Pardise or All Our Yesterdays - they just don't seem similar to me at all.

This may be a strange comparison, but the way the modern films present Spock almost reminds me more of Vorik from Voyager than of Spock.

To each their own. To me, the Nimoy Spock is best regarded as someone who is always advocating the pragmatic and rationale choice but is never not feeling his emotions. He's just choosing to keep them in check and respond to human sentimentality with sardonicism.

A lot of fans, for example, don't get that in THE UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY the "Old Vulcan proverb about Nixon" is a joke and that Spock makes jokes and jibes all the time.

I think this is precisely where the films get Spock wrong. They see him as someone who's always trying to be emotionless but for whom it's a constant struggle against a turbulent sea of emotion that's just below the surface, whereas classic Spock really was emotionally detached. He really was as rational and "straight" as he presented himself. You're right that he did still have emotion and could draw on it, which he usually did through some kind of humor, but he was always completely in control. Put differently, the emotion in Spock was never a force for him to reckon with, but something that felt like part of a very well balanced nature. Classic Spock was always aware of and in control of his emotions, whereas modern film Spock is always repressing his emotions.

[CharlesPhipps]

I think this is precisely where the films get Spock wrong. They see him as someone who's always trying to be emotionless but for whom it's a constant struggle against a turbulent sea of emotion that's just below the surface, whereas classic Spock really was emotionally detached. He really was as rationale and "straight" as he presented himself. You're right that he did still have emotion and could draw on it, which he usually did through some kind of humor, but he was always completely in control. Put differently, the emotion in Spock was never a force for him to reckon with, but something that felt like part of a very well balanced nature. Classic Spock was always aware of and in control of his emotions, whereas modern film Spock is always repressing his emotions.

*waves hand*

While Spock shows remarkable control, there's actually quite a few episodes where the plot for him is that something is fucking with his control.

* Spock loses control over his emotions when transported back in time.
* Spock loses control due to magic pollen.
* Spock loses control due to Vulcan mating fervor.
* Spock loses control due to The Naked Time virus.

Given these are some of the most iconic Spock roles, I can understand how it influences the writers interpretation even if they are things induced by outside factors.

[Lazerlike42]

I think this is precisely where the films get Spock wrong. They see him as someone who's always trying to be emotionless but for whom it's a constant struggle against a turbulent sea of emotion that's just below the surface, whereas classic Spock really was emotionally detached. He really was as rationale and "straight" as he presented himself. You're right that he did still have emotion and could draw on it, which he usually did through some kind of humor, but he was always completely in control. Put differently, the emotion in Spock was never a force for him to reckon with, but something that felt like part of a very well balanced nature. Classic Spock was always aware of and in control of his emotions, whereas modern film Spock is always repressing his emotions.

*waves hand*

While Spock shows remarkable control, there's actually quite a few episodes where the plot for him is that something is fucking with his control.

* Spock loses control over his emotions when transported back in time.
* Spock loses control due to magic pollen.
* Spock loses control due to Vulcan mating fervor.
* Spock loses control due to The Naked Time virus.

Given these are some of the most iconic Spock roles, I can understand how it influences the writers interpretation even if they are things induced by outside factors.

While it may no be your intention, you're sortof saying that modern Trek so badly got Spock wrong as to base his baseline character off of scenes when he's altogether not himself because of some kind of disease or other Sci-Fi effect. This would be like basing Kirk off of his character from The Enemy Within or Turnabout Intruder. The whole point of those episodes, and the reason that even within themselves they work as episodes, is that Spock would normally never be anything like he is being in those episodes.

[CharlesPhipps]

While it may no be your intention, you're sortof saying that modern Trek so badly got Spock wrong as to base his baseline character off of scenes when he's altogether not himself because of some kind of disease or other Sci-Fi effect. This would be like basing Kirk off of his character from The Enemy Within or Turnabout Intruder. The whole point of those episodes, and the reason that even within themselves they work as episodes, is that Spock would normally never be anything like he is being in those episodes.

Actually, my argument is that Spock struggling with his emotions is a part of his characterization so much that the TOS writers constantly found reasons to have him lose control. Furthermore, the Spock of the Kelvin movies and show isn't losing control without reason. He's someone who is more emotional but the time he LOSES control in the Kelvin films is after the genocide of his world.

Which I would say is worth a magic pollen or two.

He's chosen to live as Vulcan and be under control when BOOM. Which is a divergent character line that Nimoy himself approved of.

[Lazerlike42]

While it may no be your intention, you're sortof saying that modern Trek so badly got Spock wrong as to base his baseline character off of scenes when he's altogether not himself because of some kind of disease or other Sci-Fi effect. This would be like basing Kirk off of his character from The Enemy Within or Turnabout Intruder. The whole point of those episodes, and the reason that even within themselves they work as episodes, is that Spock would normally never be anything like he is being in those episodes.

Actually, my argument is that Spock struggling with his emotions is a part of his characterization so much that the TOS writers constantly found reasons to have him lose control.

If Spock were really struggling with his emotions then the writers wouldn't have had to find such extraordinary means to move him to lose control. The proof is in the fact that it was very nature of his character being so much in control that they did have to go out of their way to find ways to break his control.

Decades ago someone said something that I've always remembered: that seeing murders and other violent crimes on the news was a sign that these crimes were still rare enough to count as news and that if we ever stopped seeing reports about these kinds of things then we should worry, because it would mean that they're so common they weren't news anymore. Every news story about a crime is in a sense evidence of its rarity.

In a similar way, the fact that Spock losing control was a viable plot for an episode is the proof of how much in control he normally is. It's precisely because Spock was normally so much in control that getting him to be emotional was an interesting story.

All that aside, though, remember that the original point here was whether or not Quinto's portrayal of Spock is reminiscent of Nimoy's, and ultimately you're offering your take on the reasons why the two are different.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

To say that Spock only loses control a lot because he has a lot of control and therefore doesn't lose control a lot makes less sense than what CP is saying.

[CharlesPhipps]

To say that Spock only loses control a lot because he has a lot of control and therefore doesn't lose control a lot makes less sense than what CP is saying.

Allow me to rephrase:

"A lot of the stories about Spock are about Spock losing control. Saying the new Spock isn't Spock because he loses control [in this cause because he lost his homeworld or is being effected by the magical red light] is weird."

Are we meant to assume Spock could just power through the destruction of Vulcan?

The only non-Post Vulcan spock losing control moment is when he's a CHILD.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I don't know why you're retorting to me, if you are. I essentially said you make more sense.

Lazer's point was that the episodes where Spock does lose control are prolific enough to suggest that it's out of his characterization in universe. Which is as thin of ice as it gets when that becomes his specific dilemma by convention of the narrative.

[CharlesPhipps]

I don't know why you're retorting to me, if you are. I essentially said you make more sense.

Lazer's point was that the episodes where Spock does lose control are prolific enough to suggest that it's out of his characterization in universe. Which is as thin of ice as it gets when that becomes his specific dilemma by convention of the narrative.

Ah, my mistake. Thank you for that point.

[McAvoy]

I always wondered how much his human half really did anything to Spock when it came to controlling his emotions. From what we have been told, Vulcan emotions long ago were very intense much more than humans.

Did his human half actually weaken his Vulcan side's natural superiority in mental discipline?

It's not like Torres who had two species that are very distinct to each other in temperament. That it required her human side to tame her Klingon side.