Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site wudma.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mgnetp!we53!busch!wucs!wudma!ph
From: ph@wudma.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: ST IV
Message-ID: <254@wudma.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 5-May-85 12:31:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: wudma.254
Posted: Sun May  5 12:31:17 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 7-May-85 22:06:07 EDT
References: <2000@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: Washington U. in St. Louis, CS Dept. DMA Project
Lines: 35

> WHO'S PLAYING SAAVIK?
> 
> If it isn't Kirstie Allen (?), then they had better drop the character.
			  ^
	Kirstie Alley.

> Anyone else think it's time for new blood to carry the ball?

*** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE, YOU PRIMITIVE SCUZBALLS ***

	The replacement of Kirstie Alley with Robin Curtis for the second
	screen appearance of Saavik raises an interesting point: how
	would we, the fans, take it if an important character was given
	to a different actor?  Saavik is, of course, by now a pretty
	significant person, but she's not one of the "oldsters".  There
	have been three James Bonds, six Doctors Who, and untold numbers
	of Sherlock Holmeses and Lords Greystoke.  Can Kirk, Spock, McCoy,
	et. al. withstand similar treatment?  How about it, netlanders?

	By the way, if anyone's interested (:-), here's my opinion: no.
	Save for the Doctor, whose different incarnations have at least
	some small amount of doubletalk to explain them, the characters
	above were all originally created in print, and their varying
	portrayals in visual media were merely interpretations.  The
	Star Trek characters, on the other hand, were created on the
	screen.  Thus, if you will pardon my sounding like a Dannon
	commercial, Shatner IS Kirk, Nimoy IS Spock, etc.  While I would
	miss them all if new blood took over, I would prefer that to
	trying to accept new faces as old ones, or following the
	originals into retirement and Geritol commercials.

						--pH
/*
 *	"I'm a doctor, not a critic!"
 */