a cut price Season 4

[Nightowl1701]

OK, so only Nimoy would have gone. That would have been traumatic enough for the show, I think.

Takei's season 2 absence was due to his role in The Green Berets, not due to budget cuts. In production order, nearly all of the episodes he missed are consecutive; it's only in broadcast order that they're scattered through the season.

I know. I was thinking Nichelle (seeing the writing on the wall) would have been trying to get a singing career going again at that point (esp. after losing out on starring in Mannix the year earlier), and would've been counting on the episodes airing out of order to hide her absence.

I doubt they would've given Kirk a steady love interest. Part of the reason they dropped Rand was so that Kirk would be free to play the romance-of-the-week field like so many '60s action heroes.

What did they have to lose at that point? Kirk playing the field sure hadn't helped the ratings in Season 3 any, while the Landau/Bain chemistry had rocketed M:I to just shy of the top 10. And if you're gonna replace Mr. Spock, you'd better give the audience a damn good reason to want to watch his replacement. Since the hoped-for romance wouldn't blossom until near the series' end anyway, we can still allow for the occasional dalliance.

And the idea of Flint giving Kirk a sentient being as a "gift," as if she were a piece of property, is ill-conceived, to put it mildly. He might give Rayna the gift of freedom to choose her own path, out of his love for her, but he wouldn't donate her as a sex slave for Kirk's benefit. Come on.

Well, Flint was that kind of guy (sadly). Of course Rayna wouldn't see it that way, and Kirk wouldn't remember her in the first place (and vice versa). But Flint would be thinking "If it happened once, it can happen again." And since the audience does remember, they would hopefully be rooting for history to repeat itself...

In 1969-70? Nope.

Oh, it would be novel for the time, true. But if you don't have the budget for new alien designs and new model work, gotta make the most of what you got. (In fact, forget modifying the Klingon cruiser to look Romulan. Just strike a new print of the existing D-7 footage, maybe flip it upside-down, tint it either orange or green, recomposite, there's your new Romulan cruiser.)

Err, they already did produce it as "The Way to Eden." The basic premise of Dr. Sevrin and his space hippies seeking paradise and hijacking the Enterprise to find it was part of "Joanna." The main changes were replacing Kirk/Joanna with Chekov/Irina, adding Spock's rapport with the hippies, and truncating the events on the planet once it was found.

And what parts of that original premise wasn't used? Joanna and McCoy don't get along. She's chosen a career path Daddy doesn't like. Joanna wants to rebuild bridges with Daddy, but she reminds him too much of her mother. Joanna strikes up a shipboard romance Daddy doesn't approve of. (Not Chekov this time, obviously, and probably not Kirk - Sulu?!? Ohhh myyyyy... ) Build a whole new episode around that.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

^Why would that stand out more in broadcast order than production order, though?

It doesn't. But it stands out when you watch an entire season on Netflix within a couple days. That was just my motivation to do that.

 

[Christopher]

What did they have to lose at that point? Kirk playing the field sure hadn't helped the ratings in Season 3 any, while the Landau/Bain chemistry had rocketed M:I to just shy of the top 10. And if you're gonna replace Mr. Spock, you'd better give the audience a damn good reason to want to watch his replacement.

Even so, it's very unlikely that they'd have brought back an earlier guest character to be a regular. They'd more likely have created someone new.

And remember, when Mission: Impossible replaced its leads, they didn't try to make the new ones special or distinctive; they tried to make them as indistinguishable from their predecessors as possible. In '60s TV, the goal was to maintain a consistent status quo from week to week. See also Sgt. Baker replacing Kinchloe on Hogan's Heroes, and Goober Pyle replacing the spun-off Gomer Pyle on Andy Griffith. Or, later in the '70s, Coy and Vance Duke replacing Bo and Luke Duke after a contract dispute on The Dukes of Hazzard, or various Charlie's Angels being swapped out for replacements who were very similar. A lot of the time, it was simply a matter of not having to rewrite existing scripts too much.

Since the hoped-for romance wouldn't blossom until near the series' end anyway, we can still allow for the occasional dalliance.

Again, they wouldn't have had a season arc. They couldn't have known in advance what order the network would air the episodes in. Actual series finales were a rarity in those days; The Fugitive was the main example. Normally the last episode of a series would just be one more typical installment.

Of course Rayna wouldn't see it that way, and Kirk wouldn't remember her in the first place (and vice versa).

It's unclear whether that's what Spock's "Forget" meld meant. It could just be that he helped Kirk forget his pain, the depth of his feelings for her.

And since the audience does remember, they would hopefully be rooting for history to repeat itself...

Sixties TV was not predicated on the audience's memory of prior episodes. They didn't have home video then, so people couldn't record episodes for later viewing, so if they missed an episode, they might never see it, except maybe years later in syndication.

And what parts of that original premise wasn't used? Joanna and McCoy don't get along. She's chosen a career path Daddy doesn't like. Joanna wants to rebuild bridges with Daddy, but she reminds him too much of her mother. Joanna strikes up a shipboard romance Daddy doesn't approve of. (Not Chekov this time, obviously, and probably not Kirk - Sulu?!? Ohhh myyyyy... ) Build a whole new episode around that.

If Freiberger and his story editor didn't want to use those parts the first time, they wouldn't have suddenly changed their minds. Freiberger believed that McCoy was too young to have an adult daughter, which is why he nixed that subplot.

Besides, Fontana wasn't with the show anymore except on a freelance basis, and after the way her scripts were treated in the third season, I don't know if she would've wanted to pitch for the fourth. So there would've been nobody to push for the reuse of elements from "Joanna."

 

[Nightowl1701]

Just as well it never happened, at any rate.

 

[Khan 2.0]

id have taken an Irwin Allen style cut price season 4 of TOS over TAS (so long as everything then progressed as it should - movies I-VI, TNG etc...ok maybe not VOY )

 

[Keith1701]

recently ive purchased the Airwolf series (3 seasons plus a cut price 4th with a new cast, filmed on the cheap reusing stock footage from the previous seasons. abit similar to what happened with the Galactica 1980 series - even cast the same guy)

wonder what a cut price 4th Season of Trek would've been like as surely it mustve been discussed. a new cheaper crew on the Enterprise with a new Kirk like Captain (Roy Thinnes of the recently cancelled Invaders?), another Vulcan 1st officer (Martin Landau whod just finished MI?), new Doctor etc. maybe one or two secondary members would've stayed (Scotty? Sulu?) reusing a lot of FX shots from the prev seasons. Storywise I imagine it would've veered more toward late season Lost In Space/Land of the Giants/Time Tunnel/Voyage craziness, perhaps even a child on board (a pre Wesley). Basically Season 3 dialled up to 11.

Great idea.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Sixties TV was not predicated on the audience's memory of prior episodes. They didn't have home video then, so people couldn't record episodes for later viewing, so if they missed an episode, they might never see it, except maybe years later in syndication.

Since I did just mention that I recently watched in broadcast order, I will say that one glaring thing from broadcast order is that you get to see the widowed bride-to-be from Balance of Terror looking happy and holding hands with someone else exactly one episode later. I can't say whether the audience was expected to remember, but certainly the production crew didn't

 

[Christopher]

Since I did just mention that I recently watched in broadcast order, I will say that one glaring thing from broadcast order is that you get to see the widowed bride-to-be from Balance of Terror looking happy and holding hands with someone else exactly one episode later. I can't say whether the audience was expected to remember, but certainly the production crew didn't

Actually that was a case where the production crew did remember. Barbara Baldavin's character was scripted in "Shore Leave" as Mary Teller, but once Baldavin was cast, the producers remembered she'd played Angela Martine before, so they changed her name to Angela during filming -- although they missed a page, since Kirk addresses her as "Teller" at one point. The producers had no way of knowing that NBC would choose to air "Balance of Terror" and "Shore Leave" back to back; that decision was out of their hands. Production-wise, they were a full eight episodes apart.

Similarly, the character Lenore poisoned in "The Conscience of the King" was scripted as Robert Daiken, but when Bruce Hyde was cast, they changed it to Kevin Riley. (It's still Daiken in the Blish adaptation.)

 

[CrazyMatt]

The term "cut price" to me is a synonym for "cut rate", and I don't want to see anything like that. Galactica 1980 never should have gone to air.

True that.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Since I did just mention that I recently watched in broadcast order, I will say that one glaring thing from broadcast order is that you get to see the widowed bride-to-be from Balance of Terror looking happy and holding hands with someone else exactly one episode later. I can't say whether the audience was expected to remember, but certainly the production crew didn't

Actually that was a case where the production crew did remember. Barbara Baldavin's character was scripted in "Shore Leave" as Mary Teller, but once Baldavin was cast, the producers remembered she'd played Angela Martine before, so they changed her name to Angela during filming -- although they missed a page, since Kirk addresses her as "Teller" at one point. The producers had no way of knowing that NBC would choose to air "Balance of Terror" and "Shore Leave" back to back; that decision was out of their hands. Production-wise, they were a full eight episodes apart.

Well, somebody remembered. Clearly not everyone did, though, since Shatner screwed it up. Isn't it possible it was just the person she was with that remembered?

But I agree that broadcast order wasn't their fault (I was commenting on your point that they didn't plan anything long-term for that reason). Still, even eight episodes apart, she could have been directed to be a little different to acknowledge her loss. Hell, in today's world, that would have been a plot point for an episode like that. She would need a Shore Leave more than anyone else.

 

[Christopher]

Well, somebody remembered. Clearly not everyone did, though, since Shatner screwed it up. Isn't it possible it was just the person she was with that remembered?

Shatner and the other actors just read the script pages they were given. The script was being rewritten extensively during filming. There's an anecdote of Roddenberry sitting under a tree on the location and working to churn out revised pages (on a portable typewriter, I assume) before it was time to shoot them. It's not Shatner's fault that someone overlooked a "Teller" in the rush of the rewrite process.

Still, even eight episodes apart, she could have been directed to be a little different to acknowledge her loss. Hell, in today's world, that would have been a plot point for an episode like that. She would need a Shore Leave more than anyone else.

For the time, just using the same character name was about as much continuity as you could expect. Heck, it was more continuity than a lot of shows had. It wasn't unheard of for the same guest star to play two different characters in the same season of the same show.

The thing to remember is that at the time, the classy shows on TV were the anthologies, where every episode was in its own completely separate reality. Continuity and serialization were the stuff of daytime soap operas and kids' radio and movie serials. So the attitude then was the reverse of what it is today; continuity was seen as lowbrow, and thus as something to be avoided. Having continuing characters and settings could let a show save money on set construction and benefit from audience loyalty to their favorite actors, but often the goal was to write shows as if they were anthologies even when they did have continuing characters. For instance, on Mission: Impossible, there were occasional episodes where the team members showed their faces on national or global television as part of a caper, and yet they were still able to function as undercover operatives the very next week. Then there was "The Legacy," where Dan Briggs got shot in the chest in the climax, an injury that would surely require extensive hospital time if he even survived it, and yet he was perfectly fine the next week. It was almost as if each episode was in a different parallel universe with the same people in it.

 

[Shawnster]

The thing to remember is that at the time, the classy shows on TV were the anthologies, where every episode was in its own completely separate reality. Continuity and serialization were the stuff of daytime soap operas and kids' radio and movie serials. So the attitude then was the reverse of what it is today; continuity was seen as lowbrow, and thus as something to be avoided. Having continuing characters and settings could let a show save money on set construction and benefit from audience loyalty to their favorite actors, but often the goal was to write shows as if they were anthologies even when they did have continuing characters. For instance, on Mission: Impossible, there were occasional episodes where the team members showed their faces on national or global television as part of a caper, and yet they were still able to function as undercover operatives the very next week. Then there was "The Legacy," where Dan Briggs got shot in the chest in the climax, an injury that would surely require extensive hospital time if he even survived it, and yet he was perfectly fine the next week. It was almost as if each episode was in a different parallel universe with the same people in it.

Most shows are like that still today. We watched Crisis earlier this year and Gillian Anderson's character gets beat up and tortured in one episode. The very next episode she's fine with not a scratch and, according to in-series timing, that episode was only a day later or so. Same thing with X-Files. I remember seeing Mulder and Scully get into some pretty damaging scrapes and, the next episode they were completely fine.

Even if you take the approach that each episode is two weeks after the previous, our trusty cops, firefighters and so forth should still show the scars and damages of their most recent previous scrape. Sometimes they do, but not often.

 

[Ssosmcin]

For a good example of throwing continuity into the wind, just watch The Fugitive. Richard Kimble had a younger brother for one episode, but was never mentioned again, even though we saw his sister at least three times. Or his brother-in-law was seen three times but never played by the same actor twice. Or Lt. Gerard's wife was named Ann the first time she was named and Marie the second. And Quinn Martin liked to use the same actors repeatedly but in different roles. Richard Anderson played three different characters in the course of the series, the last two in the same final season.

Compared to this, Star Trek was pretty damned strict with their continuity. They at least tried to keep the names the same when an actor returned to a similar role.

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

Even if you take the approach that each episode is two weeks after the previous, our trusty cops, firefighters and so forth should still show the scars and damages of their most recent previous scrape. Sometimes they do, but not often.

I always did like that in Family, Picard was seen to have somewhat lighter skin color in the areas of his Borg implants from the previous story. Just enough continuity, without going over the edge and actually becoming The Best of Both Worlds, Part 3.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

I always did like that in Family, Picard was seen to have somewhat lighter skin color in the areas of his Borg implants from the previous story. Just enough continuity, without going over the edge and actually becoming The Best of Both Worlds, Part 3.

Yeah, that was cool. TOS had to keep everything in-episode, of course. Kirk's hand is bandaged in the final scene of "Where No Man..."

"Spock's Brain" was at the extreme of not acknowledging surgery: after having his whole brain re-inserted and re-attached to his spinal cord, Spock sat up, instantly fit as a fiddle, and his hair wasn't even mussed. Maybe McCoy used Dr. Michael Hfuhruhurr's cranial screw-top method of brain surgery. But I still enjoy the episode.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Shatner and the other actors just read the script pages they were given. The script was being rewritten extensively during filming. There's an anecdote of Roddenberry sitting under a tree on the location and working to churn out revised pages (on a portable typewriter, I assume) before it was time to shoot them. It's not Shatner's fault that someone overlooked a "Teller" in the rush of the rewrite process.

I didn't say it was Shatner's fault. I suggested it was the director's fault. If he was aware that they were going with the BoT name, he could have ensured consistency.

 

[Christopher]

"Spock's Brain" was at the extreme of not acknowledging surgery: after having his whole brain re-inserted and re-attached to his spinal cord, Spock sat up, instantly fit as a fiddle, and his hair wasn't even mussed. Maybe McCoy used Dr. Michael Hfuhruhurr's cranial screw-top method of brain surgery. But I still enjoy the episode.

That part doesn't actually bother me. After all, the only realistic way that reattaching a brain neuron by neuron could be done is by nanotechnology. So I assume that McCoy didn't open up Spock's skull at all, but used remote-controlled nanites to do the surgery. It really makes a ton more sense that way.

I didn't say it was Shatner's fault. I suggested it was the director's fault. If he was aware that they were going with the BoT name, he could have ensured consistency.

And as I said, script pages were being rewritten on the location during shooting. And of course a TV episode is shot over days, with the scenes shot out of order, and with a limited amount of time to get every shot in. The decision to make the change might've only been made after that scene was already shot, and they wouldn't have had time to go back and fix it.

Making episodic TV is like trying to assemble a train while it's roaring downhill at top speed. It's a prodigious juggling act and it's impressive that the episodes even get finished at all. Perfection is not always possible. Armchair quarterbacking is easy, but actually doing the job is far harder.

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

Star Trek was lucky, in that re-using ship sets wasn't really an issue. I'm surprised they didn't utilize this more than they did. One naturally assumes repetitive room design on a ship, I guess, so when they visit the rec room, no one in the audience is saying "Hey, what a cheat! That's the briefing room!"

An ingeniously minimalist show was Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. That one quonset hut set could represent virtually the entire base, and not draw attention to itself unless one thought about it specifically.

I'm not sure this really ties into the conversation, but I just thought I'd throw it in.

 

[Christopher]

Star Trek was lucky, in that re-using ship sets wasn't really an issue. I'm surprised they didn't utilize this more than they did. One naturally assumes repetitive room design on a ship, I guess, so when they visit the rec room, no one in the audience is saying "Hey, what a cheat! That's the briefing room!"

They redressed ship sets all the time. One set represented nearly all the different crew quarters (though Charlie's quarters in "Charlie X" were a temporary set built in a vacant area that later became McCoy's office and lab). Engineering was redressed as the gymnasium and theater. The chapel in "Balance of Terror" was another briefing room redress.

 

[BillJ]

That part doesn't actually bother me. After all, the only realistic way that reattaching a brain neuron by neuron could be done is by nanotechnology. So I assume that McCoy didn't open up Spock's skull at all, but used remote-controlled nanites to do the surgery. It really makes a ton more sense that way.

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but wouldn't Spock's skull have to be cut open and a portion removed regardless of who did the surgery? In order to replace the missing brain.