EPISODE 2 - "TO SERVE ALL MY DAYS"

Synopsis:

When Klingons threaten the Enterprise, Captain Kirk needs his best weapons officer on the bridge, but Lt. Chekov is incapacitated with a debilitating disease that is causing him to age rapidly... a disease for which Dr. McCoy can find no cure. In this story by veteran Star Trek writer D. C. Fontana, actor Walter Koenig returns as Pavel Chekov, reprising the role he made famous. Guest starring Mary Linda Rapelye, from the Original Series episode "The Way to Eden." Written by D. C. Fontana.

Directed by Jack Marshall

Written by D.C. Fontana

Running Time: 59:59

"This is starting to get very Russian" - Chekhov, To Serve All My Days

Review by Rose

If you've never visited the Star Trek: New Voyages website, (Now called Phase II for reasons unknown), just know that it's a bit difficult to actually download the episodes. There are a few mirrors, and one just has to be persistent in finding them. It doesn't make me a happy critic to have to waste time finding the episodes, but I am persistent.

**I'll try to avoid spoilers in this review, but there will be a few minor ones.**

This episode was written mainly as a vehicle for a performance by the original Chekhov, Walter Koenig, who makes a lovely appearance here. His stillness on camera, his honesty, his presence are all enchanting things to watch. I am going to be a bit rude and say: he deserved a better production.

writing: the writing could be clearer, and the characters more individual. I just found it interesting that in this particular script, the character's interactions are mostly stiff and awkward, and the lines interchangeable.

    The two young women, Uhura and another person I'm assuming is Nurse Chapel, have absolutely nothing to do in this story, which is a pity, as Uhura has a good voice and presence. (aside: Chapel (if it's her) does not look right for Chapel, which is odd as they seem to have matched everyone else mainly on "look".)

To a non-Star Trek fan, the writing is unclear: even from the beginning, the Captain's log is odd, it almost comes across as a non sequitor...and to start a show with a non sequitor is a scary thing for the viewer.

Acting:

     There are about two or three good actors in this production. The rest are varying from mediocre to bad.

     In my small dealings with New Voyages, they have been extremely arrogant and high-handed with me, so I assumed that the show was really good. Nothing could be further from the truth. The show is okay, but it is clear that a lot of the people in it have not had an acting class, or a directing class, or if they have, it's been awhile. It does pay to be respectful to everyone you deal with: because I viewed this knowing they had been extremely arrogant to me, I had much higher expectations of their perfection. If they thought so much of themselves, they had to be great, right? Wrong. Therefore this review will probably be harsher than it would have. If someone is going to act like an Oscar-Winner, they'd better be prepared to deliver an Oscar-worthy show. (although: Oscar-winners I've associated with were polite and humble. Go figure...they had nothing to prove I guess.)

     James Cawley as Kirk has a good presence, but he's so worried about physical imitation (even in the way he sits in his chair) that he is not inhabiting the character from the inside. I'd love to get that guy in an acting class and scrape away his self-awareness. It's standing in his way. When he and Bones walk toward the camera, his eyes flash to it; his body language gives away that he is completely aware of himself and the camera. He is an able actor, he could probably get rid of these bad things by learning to focus on an objective for his character, and get the focus off of himself. The camera can read one's thoughts.

     Any actor in this particular episode who wishes to learn should view the Koenig scenes. There is an actor who has an inner life, an objective, and is not "making faces." if you try to project an emotion or reaction to the camera, the camera will pick up a million tiny muscle movements and energy, and it will read as fake, fake fake.

     Many actors in this episode were undermined by nerves, stiffness, and simple wiggliness on camera. Across the boards they need to learn stillness.

     not-so-good performances:

the woman who plays the ambassador is stiff and fake, I don't believe a word she is saying. I think it's because she wiggles and postures too much onscreen. Actors, please: forget about how you look. Just get that out of your brain and start focusing on your scene partner, on what you want from them or what you want in that moment.

I think the wiggling thing comes from either no objective, nervousness, or nonspecificity. If an actor is washing everything with a general "emotion", (Kirk is guilty of this) and simply playing a quality, they will wiggle too much. They will use their eyebrows, for instance, or their hands to over-drive a point, simply because the conviction isn't coming from their core. It is tedious to watch, and even the most unschooled audience member will find they don't believe a performance done in this way, though they may not know why.

     The Klingon is just silly. I cannot stand moustache-twirling "villains". Please find a reason why your character firmly believes in what he's doing, and play that. Play your objective. Don't play "villain."

    standout performances:

Dr. "Bones" McCoy is a joy to watch: he's centered, he's got an objective for each scene, he knows what he's saying and he's made the words his own.

     the young Chekhov is quite a good actor, and looks the part (almost scarily so) unfortunately, his performance is undermined by a dreadful Russian accent. By the end of the first shuttle scene, he's gone to Scotland; he slips in and out of it, and hits the main accent changes far too hard. It is a pity he could not have spent more time with the older Chekhov, as when they have a scene together the difference in accent is quite jarring. I think a good solution would have been to record Older Chekhov, and have Younger Chekhov listen to it and live with the accent for a few months. He doesn't seem to lack an ear, so there is hope.

Cawley: as I have mentioned, he has a good presence. He makes a good Kirk. He needs training.

Older Chekhov is really the main reason to watch this episode: he gives a standout, brutally honest and poignant performance. I do hope the other actors have learned something from this man while they had the chance: look at his stillness! One does not have to "DO" anything to "be interesting" on camera: just be still and have your thoughts, layer your objective in there when you‘re doing your preliminary work, and then LIVE it on camera. Of course, one either has "it" when it comes to being onscreen, or one doesn't.

the actor playing Scotty is a good example of that. He's fine, doesn't do anything I can point out as wrong, and yet for some reason there's just no fire there. He's adequate, but not exciting to watch. It could be that he had pretty awkward camera angles every time he was onscreen, or it could just be that the camera does not love him. Who knows. I will watch him in the future with interest to see if this changes.

     directing: the directing of this show was terrible. I can put it no gentler way. IF you have three actors in a scene, don't stand them in a line and walk them down a narrow hallway so they bump awkwardly into each other, and one actor is forced to cross his arms for the entire scene! This is only one example: I found most of the scenes in this entire episode to be stiff and awkward; mainly because the director 1) did not give his actors business. (for the layman, “business” means everyday actions; as you go through your day, just notice how many times you are doing something else while you talk to someone: and notice how many times you are NOT just standing there staring at someone and talking. We look at each other far less in “real life” than beginning directors make their actors look at each other.  The result of having people stand there and stare at each other and talk is that your scenes wind up looking stiff, forced, and fake without any texture of everyday life.)  2) did not think of using more camera angles, but often just left it straight on; lots of single-shot talky talky scenes that could have been made far more dynamic by utilizing more angles. 3) the director did not correct his actors' stiffness and wiggly habits: actors rely on directors to be their "eyes", as they can't possibly know what they are doing. James Cawley, for instance, has a particular facial sneer he likes to use in order to work up some intensity. As a director, I would nix that and make him find the intensity by focusing on what he wants in the scene. the Actor who plays Spock, while very young, would be much more intriguing to watch if he could harness that complete stillness that is Spock's unique gift. I'm not talking about frozen stiffness: there is action within stillness, life going on inside; if an actor can make every movement MEAN something, and only move when he must, he will be five hundred times more powerful. This may seem to contradict the "don't be thinking about yourself and how you look" statement, but it really doesn't, for with training the stillness should be second nature. Then, when you turn to someone, it is a powerful movement, it's not lost in a sea of little twitchy nervous gestures.

     I find myself wondering if this show was directed at all, or if they just played in front of the camera.

     Now: on to the show. The storyline is intriguing, the graphics and music are nice and retro: all the sounds bring perfectly back to life the Original Star Trek. I enjoyed that aspect of this very, very much. I also enjoyed all the scenes in Scotty's chambers. In these scenes, the show jumped up several notches in professionalism: even the camera work was less banal. The female ambassador relaxed a bit and started to inhabit her character rather than sit stiffly and try to look pretty. The interaction between Chekhov and himself was wonderful, and I only was made impatient with it by the accent thing...poor young Chekhov, to be holding his own in a scene with a great actor, only undermined by that blasted accent: it was quite jarring, the difference.

Editor's Note: We leave the writers to write as they see fit. The views expressed herein are the opinions of the writer. This is one of the few times where we felt the need to add that we agree with the intent of the review and make clear that the review did not go far enough!

Sign up for our upcoming newsletter: THE GN MONTHLY! Click here to sign up:

Rose    Phase Two Home