Glenn Corbett - Zefram Cochrane

[Gary7]

The actor who played Zefram Cochrane in TOS Metamorphosis, Glenn Corbett, was at one time slated to be in an Irwin Allen production that never got off the ground. It was called "City Beneath the Sea". The short promo clip I linked shows a scene with Glenn piloting the flying sub from "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea". It was filmed in 1968, so he looks very much as he did in the TOS episode. Kind of interesting.

[Robert D. Robot]

Wow! Thank you for sharing this, Gary7! I was already familiar with Irwin Allen's 1971 made-for-television movie starring Stuart Whitman, but I had never had seen this earlier attempt at selling his concept to the television networks.

I saw the 1971 movie as a kid after Voyage went off the air, and was excited to see "City Beneath the Sea", complete with flying sub (now called a hydrofoil) and Richard Basehart (now as the U.S. President!). I think we even got to see the Seaview in the background of one scene....

Thanks again. Gotta watch this now with my breakfast!....

[Redfern]

That production "gutted" one of the Jupiter II filming miniatures, sawing additional "windows" into the upper hull and mounted it upon a column for part of the "city".

I can never forgive them for that!

(And before someone makes the effort to compose and post an overly long essay about the economics of prop, costume and set "recycling", I'm being melodramatic for comedic effect. It's a joke, son!)

Sincerely,

Bill

[E-DUB]

Corbett also starred in a TV SF movie called "The Stranger". You'll probably have a hard time finding it but it's worth a look. It kind of seemed likt the pilot for a series never picked up. Corbett is an astronaut who finds himself on a strange duplicate of Earth where a full police-state runs the show. Also stars, Lew Ayes, Sharon Acker, Cameron Mitchell and the recently deceased Steve Frankin.

[Robert D. Robot]

Redfern wrote:

---

That production "gutted" one of the Jupiter II filming miniatures, sawing additional "windows" into the upper hull and mounted it upon a column for part of the "city".

I can never forgive them for that!

(And before someone makes the effort to compose and post an overly long essay about the economics of prop, costume and set "recycling", I'm being melodramatic for comedic effect. It's a joke, son!)

Sincerely,

Bill

That is still a real shame, though! That is the hero ship of an iconic TV show and part of television history!

[Redfern]

I can't remember if it was the two foot model or the 4 foot "hero" miniature that originally held motors to extend the landing legs.

Oh, you should have seen the state of the "B9" Robot prop/costume as depicted in photos printed in an issue of StarLog. I don't know if this was before or after the infamous "Mystery Island" make-over. Shoved in a corner of a storage area, the iconic neon "grille" was shattered; the "bubble" was missing; half the "belly" lights were broken as well as the push buttons; and, of course, the pleated rubber elements had rotted.

Thankfully, it was been restored and is currently owned by producer (?) Kevin Burns. Of course, a great deal of components had to be newly fabricated, so it's a case of it being "partially" the original Robot prop.

And then there are the fans and a licensed company who have built exacting full scale replicas that actually rival the original piece in terms of functionality, so the Robot is far from being lost.

And I'm sure I've derailed this thread long enough. Sorry, guys.

Sincerely,

Bill

[scotpens]

Robert D. Robot wrote:

---

I saw the 1971 movie as a kid after Voyage went off the air, and was excited to see "City Beneath the Sea", complete with flying sub (now called a hydrofoil) and Richard Basehart (now as the U.S. President!).

They called it an "aquafoil," actually. Hydrofoils are REAL!

BTW, did the movie ever address the question of why anyone would want to live at the bottom of the ocean?

[Robert D. Robot]

scotpens wrote:

---

They called it an "aquafoil," actually. Hydrofoils are REAL!

BTW, did the movie ever address the question of why anyone would want to live at the bottom of the ocean?

You got me!... I knew I should have double-checked Google! Thanks for the correction on 'aquafoil'.

Can't remember what was going on down there. Undersea mining? It did seem a bit more comfy than living & working on those Gulf of Mexico oil rigs, I guess....

[Gary7]

Robert D. Robot wrote:

---

Wow! Thank you for sharing this, Gary7! I was already familiar with Irwin Allen's 1971 made-for-television movie starring Stuart Whitman, but I had never had seen this earlier attempt at selling his concept to the television networks.

You're welcome, Robert.


I was kind of hoping that they'd touch on some kind of ecological disaster, like sea level rising 5 ft, decimation of rain forests, rampant toxic pollution, or some combination of factors to that effect... driving the human race into the ocean to live. Considering all that the ocean has to offer, I could really see an undersea city created at some point, especially if hydro-electric technology makes a breakthrough.

[ssosmcin]

I always enjoyed these presentation films. For the meager amount of money they had, they were very well done. Notice how they play up Lawrence Montaigne's resemblance to Leonard Nimoy. According to Montaigne, he was specifically asked to emulate the Vulcan, and they even shoehorned in the word "logical" into his dialog.

The characters were clichéd beyond belief (the Irish engineer for example), but Irwin Allen at least was forward thinking enough to have a female head of security. Naming her Choo Choo didn't help, though.

The liberal use of Lost in Space background music was awesome and the final fight scene was incredibly good. Never one to waste decent footage, Irwin recycled the platform's destruction for the opening of the TV movie version. I liked the movie, but the Richard LaSalle score was a pastiche of so many other scores (including his own from Land of the Giants). Stuart Whitman didn't seem comfortable in that tight, white uniform, either.

Man from the 25th Century with Jimmy Darren is also of the same quality. Interesting, but no sale…

[bbailey861]

Thanks for sharing that, Gary7. I don't recall ever hearing about "City Beneath the Sea" before this. Today, I can see why it was never picked up but maybe back in '68 or '69, as a kid, I would have loved it. Who knows. Thanks again.

[A beaker full of death]

Am I the only one who cringes every time I hear the name "Irwin Allen" ? I mean, I'm not a stickler for hardcore sci fi, but the man may have set the televised version of the genre decades behind in its quest for respectability.

[GSchnitzer]

A beaker full of death wrote:

---

Am I the only one who cringes every time I hear the name "Irwin Allen" ? I mean, I'm not a stickler for hardcore sci fi, but the man may have set the televised version of the genre decades behind in its quest for respectability.

Oh, I don't know. The idea that you could do a science fiction television series that is not an anthology--something with continuing characters each week--wasn't really a televised science fiction set back. I think it was an agressive, forward-thinking idea. I think Irwin Allen blazed a trail for others to follow; he didn't really generate a series of roadblocks. I can't think of anything that was more seminal--with the exception of Doctor Who across the pond.

[Maurice]

The TV series Space Patrol and Tom Corbett, etc., did this years before Irwin Allen or Star Trek, so it was hardly revolutionary except, perhaps, that no prime-time network show had done it for an audience expect to be include others than kiddies.

[izarian]

never mind.