One person's memory against another.
It's the memories
of a number of people against an unwillingness on the part of others to accept those memories. The folks who prefer to believe the embellished version don't have
memories reaching back decades which contradict those who know better, so it's not a matter of memory against memory at all.
Entirely wrong? How so? I quoted the post of one person recalling an event from the 1980s which contradicts another person's memory (the actress in question, who is a primary source, unlike the people on this forum) about an event that occured during the 1960s. There is nothing wrong about what I said. It was an entirely correct and objective assessment. One memory versus another. After that, a few others chimed in agreeing with the former. Still, no hard evidence whatsoever.
I prefer to believe neither side. I have no dog in this fight. All I'm asking for is some citations. Like I said, if there's no evidence, it's just hearsay. Just because some older people who have thousands of posts on a fanatical internet forum agree that it's bullshit based on some vague recollection of conventions in the 1980s doesn't make it fact. It's just not satisfactory. Don't let your bias get in the way, Dennis. Provide some citations if you feel so strongly about it.
Sir Rhosis wrote:
Captain Robert April wrote:
It should be noted that this is not the only instance where she's gilded the lily while relating a tale. Her version of that scene in ST IV where Chekov and Uhura are asking passersby the location of the "nuclear wessels" and the lady out walking her dog tells them Alameda is in stark contrast to the versions told by both Walter Koenig and Leonard Nimoy. In Nichelle's version, they went through multiple takes, the lady wasn't supposed to say anything, but kept chiming in "because they seem so nice", eventually leading to a minor conference where Nichelle suggests they just sign the lady to a one-day contract so they can use the footage and move on.
Koenig and Nimoy, on the other hand, only tell of one take, and that the lady wasn't one of the extras, but someone off the street who was just walking her dog, had no idea there was a movie being shot, and was giving directions to these two strange people. The moment was so humorous and honest, they knew they wanted to keep it, but now it was a mad dash to track her down and get her to sign a release so they could use the footage.
And we're not talking thirty years of failing and/or revisionist memory in this case, this started within a few years of the movie.
Well, neither story of the passerby is exactly true. Layla Sarakalo gave an interview a few years ago, which I personally encapsulated for Wikipedia as follows:
"The scene in which Uhura and Chekov question passersby about the location of nuclear vessels was filmed with a hidden camera. However, the people with whom Koenig and Nichols speak were extras hired off the street for that day's shooting and, despite legends to the contrary, knew they were being filmed. In an interview with StarTrek.com
, [COLOR=#0b0080]Layla Sarakalo[/COLOR]
, the extra who said, "I don't know if I know the answer to that... I think it's across the bay, in Alameda", stated that after her car was impounded because she refused to move it for the filming, she approached the assistant director about appearing with the other extras, hoping to be paid enough to get her car out of impoundment. She was hired and told not to answer Koenig's and Nichols' questions. However, she answered them and the filmmakers kept her response in the film, though she had to be inducted into the Screen Actors Guild in order for her lines to be kept."
The original article is no longer on StarTrek.com it seems. She said she knew if she was able to get a line of dialogue in she would be paid more.
So it appears Nichols, Nimoy, and Keonig were all wrong. All within a few years of making the movie. You'd think the DIRECTOR of the film of all people would know the real story. Why doesn't anyone accuse Nimoy and Keonig of being liars? Their version of what happened during the "nuclear vessels" scene seem to be just as inaccurate as Nichols's version. Yet she is the only one painted as a liar. In reality, they all probably just had faulty memories or didn't get the complete story while filming within a hectic schedule on location... Or any other number of reasons.