TV vs Movies

[viper37]

The movies did more with James Kirk in six hours than the show did in eighty.  But otherwise I do generally agree.

because the movies came after the TV show wich established James T. Kirk as he was.  Seeing the movies without never having seen the series, I doubt you'd find them interesting.

[Malthus]

Kirk is a perfect example of everything wrong with the movies these days.

Not only is he a character imported from TV, the current version is a reboot of a character imported from TV! 

It's a recycling of a recycling, because reselling what you know will sell makes more sense than taking a risk on anything original.

[Ideologue]

The movies did more with James Kirk in six hours than the show did in eighty.  But otherwise I do generally agree.

I'd actually argue that season one Captain Kirk was the most interesting Kirk of the lot (he actually had to make some hard decisions in which either option would result in tragedy).  Neither the later seasons nor the movies really advanced his character, but that wasn't necessary.  He was already set to be an icon, just because he was the biggest name in the first really successful (even if only in reruns) SF series on TV.

I dunno, the movies had him make mistakes that killed like half his crew and his best friend, and put in motion the events that killed his son, and led him to throw away everything he'd ever worked for--because he cared more about the people he loves than his duty, which is a real shift for the character.

Also he overcomes prejudice and stuff in the last one.