RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,229
Posts: 5,405,745
Members: 24,761
Currently online: 519
Newest member: beakel001

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: Time’s Orphan
By: Michelle on Aug 30

September-October Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Lee Passes
By: T'Bonz on Aug 29

Trek Merchandise Sale
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek #39 Villain Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Trek Big Bang Figures
By: T'Bonz on Aug 28

Star Trek Seekers Cover Art
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Fan Film Axanar Kickstarter Success
By: T'Bonz on Aug 27

Two New Starship Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26

Trek Actor Wins Emmy
By: T'Bonz on Aug 26


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek TV Series > Star Trek - Original Series

Star Trek - Original Series The one that started it all...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 22 2012, 09:27 PM   #1
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Watching Trek in Airdate Order

I'm actually watching all the shows in airdate order pretty much for the first time. I usually just pick whatever episode I'm in the mood for, but after awhile, I found I was falling back on the same dozen favorites. So now I'm just staring from the premiere and following the network run (the original versions, not TOS-R). We'll see how long this lasts before I'm distracted by something else ("Oo, piece of candy!").

I'm only two episodes in, but man, it's funny how wacky some of the editing choices were. I credit all of them to the production being under the gun and getting the bugs worked out. I'm not faulting them. It's just amusing:

1) to hear Scotty responding to Kirk on the communicator when he's not in the episode (Man Trap), or Sulu doing the same thing (Charlie X).

2) Seeing close up shots of actors whose expressions don't match the master shot (Kirk, Spock and McCoy on the bridge in Charlie X - Spock says "out of the question" with a different haircut and totally different tone of voice and mood).

3) "When I came aboard!"

4) Uhura's close up looking like she's about to cry a full second after she was giving Charlie a thoroughly nasty look. And the close ups of McCoy and Spock and then Kirk standing in totally different positions on the bridge than in the master.

It's also interesting to note that Charlie X has no shots of the "series version" of the Enterprise miniature. It is the only regular episode to use only shots from the pilots. Which means it's the only regular episode to be relatively consistent when showing the Enterprise. No spinning nacelle lights, no glowing ball, different impulse engines and the taller bridge dome.

Lots of interesting sound effect choices in The Man Trap as they get things worked out. When Spock expands his sensor search radius, we get an awesome but stereotypically sci-fi sound effect I don't believe is ever used again. The tricorder sounds different (and Kirk carries it!), as do most of the landing party equipment. It's all a lot of fun watching this stuff evolve.

They eventually get the glitches ironed out (although the third season had more than a few 'reverse shots" of Shatner close ups to fill in some holes), but in the beginning, some of these things were just weird. Mudd's Women will also be fun on this level (vocal inflection changes, mismatched close up shots, etc.).

Beyond that, I'm happy to be seeing some episodes I don't normally revisit. Man Trap I've seen too often, but Charlie X was one I usually skipped. Too much time spent on Uhura singing ("Charlie's our new DAHHHHH-LING!"), but the story is a great update of Twilight Zone's "It's a Good Life." Same "kid with powers who wishes you away when he's mad" but this one picks up when the kid is a few years older. It starts off as an awkward and uncomfortable coming of age story, but switches into horror when Charlie's powers are outed. The blanking of the girl's face is extremely chilling, very Twilight Zoneish. Yet, for all that, Charlie's fate is still sad. Never a favorite episode of mine because of the singing. I remember liking it more as a kid, but that was probably because the rec room scenes were cut for syndication.

As far as The Man Trap, it's a weird episode to kick off the series with; actually this and Charlie X are odd ones to start things off. But MT is fun, I like monsters and this one is handled pretty intelligently. I still think Kirk was a little over the top in killing it when it could easily have been reasoned with. Killing the monster stalking the corridors was Irwin Allen territory, but the extra dimension of sympathy for the creature makes this different. Considering the creature was simply trying to survive, and knowing that giving it a supply of salt would keep it in check, killing should have been a last resort. Gene Coon would have handled this episode differently (he did, actually, in Devil in the Dark).

One thing I'd like to have confirmed; some of the dialog makes it seem as if the creature was physically changing its form, but in the teaser, it looks different depending on who is looking at it. In fact, it seemed somewhat telepathic. So was it actually changing its shape or was it making people see what they wanted to see? Seems a little fuzzy and the telepathy wasn't touched on really, which is a shame; it's an interesting tidbit. I'm more in line with it fooling people rather than being an actual shape shifter. Which means McCoy wasn't being hugged by a Nancy replica. He was hugging a hairy, suction cupped, fanged monster. That's pretty creepy.

All in all, two good, if weird, hours of Trek.

Scott
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 23 2012, 03:29 AM   #2
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

Also a couple of interesting bits not seen in syndication, unless they run the DVD prints: both The Man Trap and Charlie X sport main titles that carry the "created by Gene Roddenberry" credit, the "Star Trek" title shrinkage and all. Only these two episodes carry it and the "in episode" credits only shows Gene as producer. The prints used in syndication in the 80's as well as the VHS and laserdisc don't have this version and the in episode credits list Gene as creator and producer. I wonder why only these two episodes had this opening and not all of them? Especially considering the up front created by credit would be used in the second and third seasons.

And for some odd reason, for The Man Trap only, Sick Bay is called the Dispensary.

You guys all know this stuff, but it's fun (for me) to note.
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 23 2012, 03:01 PM   #3
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

Where No Man Has Gone Before: kind of a chore if only because I've seen this episode SO many times. And recently. But I didn't want to skip it.

This is a huge step up from the first two episodes and really, IMO, should have been run first. Justman and Solow had gone on record about this one, saying it was to expository to be aired first and a pilot is made to sell the series, not necessarily to air. This, frankly, is ridiculous. You don't pour that much money, work and talent into a TV pilot with no intention of airing it. Even The cage intended to either air or be expanded into a feature. As for exposition, it's no more so than any other episode. It sets of the story, not the series premise. It doesn't spend a half hour introducing every single main character, it actually moves very quickly from the start to the main action and conflict. It's an excellent sci-fi story with lots of theatricality and an an awesome fistfight at the end.

I can only imagine how viewers felt about the sudden changes three weeks in. Costumes, casting, the lack of main title narration all probably took a few people by surprise. Did people know it was the pilot episode? Would they have gotten than info from, say, TV Guide or something? It's a smashing episode with some extremely strong work by Bill Shatner. On his performance alone, I would have bought the series.

The Naked Time: another classic. It's interesting how the series starts off with episodes strongly featuring the supporting cast. It's good for fleshing out the people on screen, but little did the audience know, this practice would end very quickly. Later episodes would focus more on plot, while these early episodes have a feel of "let's take a few minutes for charactwerization."

Even with some humor, this is a tense and fairly grim story, with lots of physical action and a ticking clock that works extremely well. Leonard Nimoy shines in this one, with his one-take breakdown in the briefing room and subsequent recovery as Kirk deteriorates. There's a nice bit where Kirk slaps Spock a few times to get him to snap out of it. One slap, two, three - Spock catches the fourth. Kirk whales him with a fifth, only this time Spock backhands him in reply sending Kirk flying over the table onto the floor. This is the first real example of the superior Vulcan strength and it is not spoken of, only demonstrated. Shatner goes a little over the top in the briefing room, but it is that kind of disease, so he gets a pass. Unintentional humor as McCoy rips Kirk's tuning to give him the shot. Nobody else is standing around with bared shoulders.

More great moments:

"No dance tonight…."
"I can't change the laws of physics!"
"Please, not again."
The brief trip back in time. Amazing how that is just one last plot point at the end of the episode, setting up the possibility of more time travel (which didn't really happen this way).

All in all, a solid, fun, exciting episode. The series was doing very well finding its footing.

Is anyone finding these observations interesting? I know dozens of people have done episode reviews (Warped9 most recently and The Laughing Vulcan did some great reviews) and I may not be bringing anything new to the table. I'll stop if it's boring to folks. Like I said upthread, I have no idea how long I'm gonna go before my ADD pushes me off track anyway.
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 23 2012, 08:55 PM   #4
plynch
Commodore
 
plynch's Avatar
 
Location: Outer Graceland
View plynch's Twitter Profile
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

"Let's take a few minutes" is an apt phrase for early S1. Later, and fo sho by S2, they were cranking out more efficient Star Trek plot-shows. Wonder why. The demands of the weekly grind? GR leaving the story-rewrite end?
__________________
Author of Live Like Louis! Inspirational Stories from the Life of Louis Armstrong, http://livelikelouis.com
plynch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 02:49 AM   #5
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

One of these days I'm going to watch the series in stardate order.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 03:58 AM   #6
RandyS
Vice Admiral
 
RandyS's Avatar
 
Location: Randyland
View RandyS's Twitter Profile
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

Warped9 wrote: View Post
One of these days I'm going to watch the series in stardate order.
If you ever get that worked out, please forward me a list.

RandyS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 04:00 AM   #7
Warped9
Admiral
 
Warped9's Avatar
 
Location: Brockville, Ontario, Canada
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

RandyS wrote: View Post
Warped9 wrote: View Post
One of these days I'm going to watch the series in stardate order.
If you ever get that worked out, please forward me a list.

I actually worked it out some years ago. I'll dig it up tomorrow and share.
__________________
STAR TREK: 1964-1991, 2013-?
Warped9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 04:01 AM   #8
E-DUB
Captain
 
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

On another board I frequent we watched each first season episode on the anniversary of the original airdate, and then commented on them as if it were the 1960's and we were seeing them for the first time.

A lot of wink-wink nudge-nudge stuff like "Too bad they killed that Romulan commander. Now we'll never see that guy again."

But it was a lot of fun. Hmmm, almost time for season 2.
E-DUB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 04:09 AM   #9
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

I don't understand how airdate order came to be considered the authoritative one. For decades, at least from the time The Star Trek Compendium came out in 1980, production order was the universal standard. Reference books listed them in production order, they were stripped in syndication in production order, the first home video and DVD releases were in production order, and The Star Trek Chronology listed them in production order. For a generation, it was universally, officially accepted that production order was the correct order. Yet for some reason, when the first box sets came out in 2004, they were done in airdate order, and somehow the standard that was universal for a quarter-century has been completely reversed in the past 8 years. That's just weird. (Well, not completely. The Pocket Books timeline and the novels still assume the episodes occurred in production order.)

Especially since production order makes more sense. There wasn't enough continuity for there to be any huge discrepancies in airdate order, but a few show up, like the second pilot with its different sets, props, and uniforms being aired third, or "The Corbomite Maneuver," with Kirk reacting to Rand as if she's only just been assigned to him, coming tenth. And you can follow the gradual development and refinement of characters, sets, and concepts better in production order. There aren't any advantages to airdate order that I can see.

Oh, and if you want a list of the episodes in stardate order, there's one on pp. 12-13 of the Ballantine edition of The Star Trek Concordance. It doesn't really make sense, though, since the lowest stardate goes to the animated episode "The Magicks of Megas-tu," among other oddities.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 05:31 AM   #10
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

My guess is because airdate order is the standard for DVD season sets (at least in the US) and since that's the way the series was originally run, etc. blah yadda. Of course, there are exceptions (Firefly and so on), but in the long run, how much does it matter? Do the majority of people actually sit down and watch the series from beginning to end, or do they pick and choose episodes? This is the first time I can remember watching them in this order intentionally.

For stardate order, let's travel back to the glorious days of the Columbia House releases where they actually put them in that awful order. You think airdate order makes no sense?
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 02:42 PM   #11
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

It's just strange, that's all. That something could be a universally accepted standard for a quarter-century and then be all but completely reversed within a few years.

Plus there's the fact that I spent most of my life as a Trek fan experiencing TOS in production order -- seeing it in that order countless times in syndication, reading about it that way in all the references, getting the re-releases of the Blish novelizations published in that order, etc. So it's really jarring to have those decades of consistent precedent suddenly overthrown. Airdate order will never feel right to me.

And the "it's the way it was originally run" argument may work for a lot of series -- like TNG, where they shot "Unification" out of order due to Nimoy's schedule, or M*A*S*H, where the production-order syndication run totally screwed up the chronology of when B.J. and Potter arrived at the 4077th. But it doesn't work for TOS, because the airdate order was not chosen for story reasons. It was sometimes because the network wanted to lead with strong episodes -- they chose "The Man Trap" to open season 1 because it was a monster story, and chose Spock episodes to open the other two seasons because he was the most popular character by a huge margin -- and sometimes just because of production logistics, some episodes' special effects taking longer to complete than others and thus having to air later. There are certainly shows where airdate order is preferable, but for TOS it's completely arbitrary and has no benefit to the viewing experience. So I think it was a mistake for the makers of the DVD set to apply that "standard" in this particular case.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 03:11 PM   #12
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

I agree, I think it works better in production order myself. Just because of how everything evolved. Land of the Giants is the same way.
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 03:11 PM   #13
ssosmcin
Rear Admiral
 
ssosmcin's Avatar
 
Location: ssosmcin
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

Did a three episode marathon last night. I find myself noticing more and more tech things now that the plots are moldy and old in my brain after 42 years of watching the series.

The Enemy Within - Fantastic episode, one I don't go to as often as I would think. Shatner's great here and the cast is quite good, even of the personalities are still wobbly. A couple of bits stood out as bothersome, one because of the era, the other because it just seemed wrong.

1. Janice is nearly raped and she never once stands up for herself afterward. She wouldn't "have even mentioned it." In other words, if not for Fisher seeing it, she would have let "Kirk" get away with his assault (leaving him to explain the scratches, I imagine). "…and he IS the captain." Does this mean she feels he can take certain liberties? I think they were trying to play up loyalty to the captain and she obviously has attraction toward him. Also, rape was always a taboo subject back then, so even touching it is amazing, but the post-rape attempt really puts Janice in a very submissive light. Spock's joke at the end is legendary in its inappropriateness.

2. McCoy's dismissive line about "they'd die anyway" is bothersome to me. I get that Bones is trying to keep Kirk from putting himself at risk and yes, the landing party would die either way if the machine wasn't fixed, but the way it's delivered makes it sound like McCoy has written them off and doesn't care. A doctor?

As is the norm with Leo Penn's TV work, a few scenes seem to have been switched around seem off. Kirk and Spock being told by Scotty about the two dogs should have been later - after Spock decides there is an imposter aboard. The reveal of the malfunction should have followed this and THAT should have been the fade out to commercial. This would fix a few lines between Spock and Kirk which seem odd now ("I've been here since you left me - alone Mr. Spock" would work better if Kirk and Spock weren't walking the ship in between the rape attempt and this scene).

When Fisher falls and slashes his hand, he very gingerly opens the communicator grid with his hurt hand. Poor guy, if he just would have flipped it with the other, he wouldn't have had to suffer through that. And the "chirps" are absurdly long. There are like 9 of them.

We hear Uhura on the intercom, but she's not in this episode. A standard problem in the early episodes. When we first see Farrell at the climax, his short is missing its insignia. Much like Kirk's at the beginning.

Minor but interesting hiccups in an otherwise fine, legendary episode.

Mudd's Women - Hard to believe this was one of the three candidates for second pilot, it's not that good. Roger Carmel is annoying at times with his over the top bluster and handlebar mustache, but he gets better as he drops his "Leo Walsh" fašade. Lots of technical issues and a TON of dubbing in the teaser. Every time Spock is off screen, his voice is poorly looped. He is somewhat tense in the looping and WAAAAAAY laid back in the on camera delivery ("and his engines arrrrrrrre super heating"). Close up shots of Kirk are from The Naked Time and the expression doesn't match the master shots again. The transporter scene, once the women show up, is do badly edited, it's the stuff of legend. Before the women move from the pad, a close up shows them standing in a row; the dark haired girl's close up is from or used in the sick bay scene, and Bones' close up is also from that point. I'm surprised at how sloppy the editing was in the early episodes. Were they THAT under the gun?

Mudd notes that Spock is part Vulcanian. Never mind the abandoned name for the people of Vulcan, what made him deduce Spock was not a FULL Vulcan?

Kirk, Spock, and Mudd beam down to Rigel and walk toward a metal housing complex. Inside it looks like it's made out of rock, like the carved out interior of a cave. Which is weird, especially the rock on hinges which acts as a door. At the end, Childress says Kirk is welcome to the crystals (which are "here") and Kirk tells Spock he's beaming aboard with them. Yet Kirk and Mudd leave without taking any. The Enterprise, at this point, is minutes from plummeting into the atmosphere. After the "throw away the key" line, Kirk must have turned around after realizing he forgot something.

The climax is just too much, asking us to swallow Eve, merely by believing in herself, can have perfectly done hair and makeup out of nowhere. How any of the speech making amounted to them being blissfully in love is a mystery. Eh, now I remember why I don't watch this one that much.

What Are Little Girls Made Of? - this is an interesting, Spock-lite episode, when Kirk was the main character. Spock is in so little of this, it's a wonder Nimoy is listed in the opening credits. An interesting story, done somewhat better on Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (The Cyborg), this is a claustrophobic episode. Technically, it's a winner; the split screen and makeup effects are top drawer. The penis rock, though, cracks me up and ruins the tension. Kirk convinces Ruk to betray Corby a little too easily, but Ted Cassidy's performance makes up for it.

Somehow putting a half sized blob of molded paper mache on a lazy Susan makes androids. I really need to try that.

Not much to say about this one, it's not BAD, but it's not great either. It's bland and relies too much on Majer Barrett, who was never that great as Nurse Chapel. Sherry Jackson, however, is wonderful to look at and her final scene is weirdly touching.
__________________
"Tranya is people!"
ssosmcin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 04:34 PM   #14
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

ssosmcin wrote: View Post
As far as The Man Trap, it's a weird episode to kick off the series with; actually this and Charlie X are odd ones to start things off.
Weird in retrospect, sure, but for the network schedulers -- for which ST was something brand new and undefined -- their touchstones for what science fiction was on TV were The Twilight Zone and The Outer Limits, plus the Irwin Allen shows you mentioned. You cited "Charlie X" as a TZ-like episode; well, "The Man Trap" was basically an Outer Limits monster-of-the-week story. It fit their expectations for sci-fi TV -- thrills, suspense, weird monsters -- better than the more character- and idea-driven episodes that preceded it in production sequence.


One thing I'd like to have confirmed; some of the dialog makes it seem as if the creature was physically changing its form, but in the teaser, it looks different depending on who is looking at it. In fact, it seemed somewhat telepathic. So was it actually changing its shape or was it making people see what they wanted to see? Seems a little fuzzy and the telepathy wasn't touched on really, which is a shame; it's an interesting tidbit. I'm more in line with it fooling people rather than being an actual shape shifter.
Oh, definitely. The teaser makes that quite clear, and I'm not aware of anything in the episode that suggest it's physically shapeshifting instead. There are a few lines about how it can "assume any shape" or "take other forms," but that's ambiguous enough that it could mean "project the illusion of other shapes." Or maybe the speakers, Kirk and McCoy, didn't know enough about the nature of its powers and assumed it was physically morphing when it was really illusion-casting.


ssosmcin wrote: View Post
This is a huge step up from the first two episodes and really, IMO, should have been run first. Justman and Solow had gone on record about this one, saying it was to expository to be aired first and a pilot is made to sell the series, not necessarily to air. This, frankly, is ridiculous. You don't pour that much money, work and talent into a TV pilot with no intention of airing it.
Actually, yes, a lot of TV pilots have not been aired. It's a nice bonus when you can air the pilot as part of the series, but it's not guaranteed, especially not in the '60s. Back then, pilots really were intended more as demo reels to sell a show to networks, and it wasn't a given that they would ever air on TV (which is why "The Cage" was over 60 minutes long and couldn't possibly have fit into a standard broadcast time slot). You pour money into the pilot because it's what will get the series on the air if it's good enough. It's an investment that you're hoping will lead to a bigger payoff.

Yes, often, when it's feasible, the pilot will be shown as part of the series, or if a lot of changes are made, will have portions of it recycled in various series episodes (as with "The Cage" and the pilots of shows like Gilligan's Island, Lost in Space, and more recently Dollhouse). You do want to recoup that investment if you can. But sometimes pilots are never broadcast at all, like the original pilots of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Avatar: The Last Airbender.


As for exposition, it's no more so than any other episode. It sets of the story, not the series premise. It doesn't spend a half hour introducing every single main character, it actually moves very quickly from the start to the main action and conflict. It's an excellent sci-fi story with lots of theatricality and an an awesome fistfight at the end.
Well, leaving aside production order concerns and thinking only about which episode would be the best introduction to the show and its world, I'd say "The Corbomite Maneuver" would be a better intro than "Where No Man." WNM lacks McCoy and Uhura, it focuses heavily on characters who don't survive the episode, and its "look and feel" are different from the series. TCM is a good, solid introduction to the ensemble in their familiar roles, and most importantly it's a great introduction to the meaning and purpose of the Enterprise's mission and what the characters believe in and stand for.


I can only imagine how viewers felt about the sudden changes three weeks in. Costumes, casting, the lack of main title narration all probably took a few people by surprise. Did people know it was the pilot episode? Would they have gotten than info from, say, TV Guide or something?
I'm not sure the general public of the day would've been as savvy about the TV production process as we are today. The book The Making of Star Trek was a seminal work in the behind-the-scenes/"making-of" genre. I think it and the books and TV specials that followed it created a lot more public interest and understanding about the production process than had existed before. And just three weeks into a once-a-week series, viewers might not have remembered the exact details of sets and costumes all that well. I know that when I was watching the show in reruns as a child, it took me a few years before my nebulous sense that something was different about "Where No Man" blossomed into an understanding of what it really was.

And it's not like there weren't other changes between early episodes -- changes in Uhura's and Spock's costumes, an evolution of Spock's makeup and personality, ongoing alterations to the engineering set, and so on. Not to mention the tendency of '60s shows to have different supporting characters week to week and not bother to explain the change. ST's sister show Mission: Impossible changed its team composition all the time and never bothered to give any explanations for a cast change until the seventh season. So '60s viewers would've been somewhat accustomed to such week-to-week variations, and a lot of them wouldn't even really have noticed.


The Naked Time: another classic. It's interesting how the series starts off with episodes strongly featuring the supporting cast. It's good for fleshing out the people on screen, but little did the audience know, this practice would end very quickly. Later episodes would focus more on plot, while these early episodes have a feel of "let's take a few minutes for charactwerization."
TOS was originally meant as an ensemble drama, which you can really see in the early episodes. But Spock swiftly became the breakout star, and the network wanted everything to revolve around him. Roddenberry and Shatner resisted that, but still the show ended up centered overwhelmingly on Spock and on the two characters most closely connected to him, Kirk and McCoy.

And yes, there was a shift from a more dramatic emphasis early on to a more action-oriented emphasis later, probably due to network pressure.


The brief trip back in time. Amazing how that is just one last plot point at the end of the episode, setting up the possibility of more time travel (which didn't really happen this way).
Yeah, the completely pointless trip back in time. This was originally meant to lead directly into "Tomorrow is Yesterday," but then it was decided not to have inter-episode continuity, so it was rewritten. They should've just removed the time travel element altogether, since without the lead-in it served absolutely no purpose and was just a weird non sequitur.



ssosmcin wrote: View Post
1. Janice is nearly raped and she never once stands up for herself afterward. She wouldn't "have even mentioned it." In other words, if not for Fisher seeing it, she would have let "Kirk" get away with his assault (leaving him to explain the scratches, I imagine). "…and he IS the captain." Does this mean she feels he can take certain liberties? I think they were trying to play up loyalty to the captain and she obviously has attraction toward him. Also, rape was always a taboo subject back then, so even touching it is amazing, but the post-rape attempt really puts Janice in a very submissive light. Spock's joke at the end is legendary in its inappropriateness.
Welcome to 1966, a place where folks like Todd Akin apparently still reside. I don't think rape was really that unusual a subject matter at the time, and in fact it was often a source of what was considered light comedy, like the stock gag of the lecherous boss chasing his secretary around the desk. (I once came across an old hardcover book collecting material from Playboy in the 1950s, and it had a number of "cute" cartoons involving rape or sexual victimization, like a nude rape victim lamenting to a friend, "And then the police arrived and re-enacted the crime," while looking more exhausted than traumatized.) What we'd consider sexual harrassment was seen as normal, playful flirtation, and the idea that men should defer to women's rights and wishes in a sexual interaction, rather than the other way around, just didn't exist until the sexual revolution came along a few years later.


We hear Uhura on the intercom, but she's not in this episode. A standard problem in the early episodes.
Well, it was cheaper to pay them for just the voiceovers, which were probably recorded when they came in to shoot other episodes. Actually it's impressive that the producers of TOS were as loyal to their recurring cast as they were.


Mudd's Women - Hard to believe this was one of the three candidates for second pilot, it's not that good.
Well, maybe they thought it would work out better than it did. It's the one that comes closest to fitting the "Wagon Train to the stars" pitch line Roddenberry used, since it's basically a Western plot transposed into space -- Harry actually refers to his scheme as "wiving settlers," an Old West practice featured in the TV series Here Come the Brides.


Mudd notes that Spock is part Vulcanian. Never mind the abandoned name for the people of Vulcan, what made him deduce Spock was not a FULL Vulcan?
As I remarked in an earlier thread, the original series pitch document explained Spock's alien features by saying he was "probably half-Martian." I suspect that originally, the idea behind making Spock half-human and half-alien was that his features -- mostly humanlike but with a few alien attributes -- would represent a mix of the two races, and that a full member of Spock's father's species would look less human than Spock did. (I.e. kinda like B'Elanna Torres vs. a full Klingon, or Farscape's Scorpius vs. a full Scarran.) Although that assumption went out the window when "Balance of Terror" gave us Romulans who looked exactly like Spock and were thus assumed to be related to Vulcans, and particularly when we finally saw other Vulcans in "Amok Time."
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 24 2012, 05:12 PM   #15
Harvey
Admiral
 
Harvey's Avatar
 
Re: Watching Trek in Airdate Order

Christopher wrote: View Post
Well, it was cheaper to pay them for just the voiceovers, which were probably recorded when they came in to shoot other episodes. Actually it's impressive that the producers of TOS were as loyal to their recurring cast as they were.
I think they wanted to have a sense of continuity of personnel. And, with the exception of Nichelle Nichols, they weren't day players. Kelley, Whitney, and Takei were all guaranteed to be in 7 of the program's first thirteen episodes and Doohan was guaranteed to be in 5 of the first thirteen.
__________________
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek

My blog: Star Trek Fact Check.
Harvey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.