3 ms·
I remember the 1960s Star Trek and Doctor Who had bad special effects, but had the story and acting that made up for it. The story made it real; now we have spe
by orionblastar 11mo ago
I remember the 1960s Star Trek and Doctor Who had bad special effects, but had the story and acting that made up for it. The story made it real; now we have special effects with AI and supercomputers, but how good is the story? Writers and actors make the difference.
- m463 11mo agoI thought star trek had good effects, but doctor who was just terrible. But I was young - and young people are visual but not aware of subtlety. I also thought the original batman was an action show. Decades later I watched it as an adult and it was a comedy, and hilarious.
- orionblastar 11mo agoBatman '66 was campy; they tried to dumb it down for kids and censored the violence with Biff and Bam effects like the comic had.
- happymellon 11mo agoHollywood acting is basically nonexistent these days. You get Chris Pratt in to play "Chris Pratt in this situation". 60's Trek was cheesy, but at least they tried.
- Pet_Ant 11mo agoYeah it's less about Chris Pratt's ability to inhabit and exude a character, as much as co-branding them film with Chris Pratt's brand as a cross-over.