When I think of Spock in the original series (#TOS), I find more than a few things implausible.
Would, for example, Spock really know impossible odds with multiple unknown variables to several decimal places? More seriously, in TOS, Spock never satisfactorily explained the Vulcan logic for logic. They've addressed this since, but I had realized that the attachment to life is emotional, not logical, and therefore concluded that in denying emotion, Vulcans could have no logical reason to live.
Even Leonard Nimoy's Spock addressed some of this in the movies, and they aren't quoting odds to ludicrous precision anymore, so I find the more recent iterations of Spock much more believable.
As for the acting, Ethan Peck plays a younger, less experienced Spock. Given Vulcan lifespans, this probably shouldn't make quite the difference we see. But that's how I've accounted for that difference and I've been interested in seeing the backstory.
I found this after reading and responding to this post here about early Trek fans’ prejudicial negative reaction to TNG. One of my responses (see here) was to point out that any fans of the progressiveness of Trek ought to have been mindful of the room for improvement over TOS, with female representation being an obvious...
I died. This made me laugh for 5 minutes. I couldn't breathe. ( lemmy.ml )
How Many Star Trek Episodes Pass the Bechdel Test? (TOS to ENT) | The Mary Sue ( www.themarysue.com )
I found this after reading and responding to this post here about early Trek fans’ prejudicial negative reaction to TNG. One of my responses (see here) was to point out that any fans of the progressiveness of Trek ought to have been mindful of the room for improvement over TOS, with female representation being an obvious...