Why did Majel stop playing Chapel in the movies?

[A beaker full of death]

People get a kick out of seeing the whole mishpucha. They even had Kyle in STII. So the writers will find a way to get them in. In the last TNG movie, they didn't even pretend to have an excuse for Worf to be there -- they just said, "fuck it, Worf is here too."

The Homicide: Life on the Street reunion movie found a way to have everyone who was ever a series regular show up - even the dead ones.

 

[Pauln6]

This makes the most sense. I liked Chapel in the series. It's a shame she's been lost as part of the ensemble. She's not even in the new movies.

IMHO, the Ensemble nature of the Main Cast would have been diminished by leaving out Sulu, Chekov and Uhura...

The original cast was never an ensemble. It was three stars, one almost-lead (Doohan) and some featured players. Fans decided it was some kind of "ensemble cast" after the fact, but it never actually was.

This thread plays on my pet hate!

The original cast had TWO stars, and THREE almost leads, since Kelley AND Whitney had special status, and Scotty was a shade beneath that in status even if he punched above his weight in story importance. Rand is glossed over because, while McCoy and Scotty had broad niches that allowed them to develop, she was a 'lowly secretary' who was not developed quickly or broadly enough as the show progressed. I love Helen Noel but there was no real reason why Rand should not have filled that role, despite the nonsense about them not bringing the relationship (which was in any event dancing all over the bridge regularly) 'out in the open'. In fact the episode would have been a cracking way for them to understand that their attraction had no future and move on.

They gave limp excuses as far as character development goes partly fuelled by off-screen issues. The original intent was for Rand to be the important female lead and I for one will always stand up for her status in that regard.

I think that after STIV both Chapel and Rand should have been given recurring minor roles. Both movies have MANY spare characters running around that could easily have been played by either or both actresses. David Warner's character in STV could have been Chapel with only a few story tweaks. Chapel or Rand or Saavik as presidential liaisons would have worked without missing a beat.

And don't get me started on how the sexism of the new movies excised two of the three recurring females from the story. That really makes me mad. I don't even know why they kept Chapel as a nurse in her cameo, since she was a biologist until Korby went missing several years AFTER the NuTrek timeline. Sexism and sheer lack of imagination. As a scientist her story potential expands. As a nurse she shrinks into McCoy's shadow. Bad, bad, bad writing.

I also think that the reason neither character has made any significant recent appearances in the IDW comics is because the producers want to retain the mere possibility of using them in upcoming movies so they remain in limbo, unjustly under-developed and underused yet again.

 

[HIjol]

To me, they have been, and always will be, an Ensemble Cast.

Any sighting of any of them in Any guise is a pleasure!

 

[MANT!]

People get a kick out of seeing the whole mishpucha. They even had Kyle in STII. So the writers will find a way to get them in. In the last TNG movie, they didn't even pretend to have an excuse for Worf to be there -- they just said, "fuck it, Worf is here too."

The Homicide: Life on the Street reunion movie found a way to have everyone who was ever a series regular show up - even the dead ones.

But no Lt. Commander Kevin Riley..and darn even if he only appeared in 2 episodes-he sure made a favorable impression on me..too bad the character was never used again..

 

[Drone]

Maurice was discussing the real-world terms under which the actors worked on the show, period.

If that's the case, it doesn't invalidate the entirety of my comment, does it? I think I saliently referenced both in and out of universe elements relevant to the contention.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

This makes the most sense. I liked Chapel in the series. It's a shame she's been lost as part of the ensemble. She's not even in the new movies.

IMHO, the Ensemble nature of the Main Cast would have been diminished by leaving out Sulu, Chekov and Uhura...

The original cast was never an ensemble. It was three stars, one almost-lead (Doohan) and some featured players. Fans decided it was some kind of "ensemble cast" after the fact, but it never actually was.

It's not your intent I realize, but doesn't this rendering of the importance of the other players, inevitably give short shrift to the very noteworthy role, culturally if not as actors, that the inclusion of Nichols and Takei in the cast meant at that time in TV history, as well as forwarding the narrative of the TOS era being enlightened in its unquestioned acceptance of diversity, at least as regards Terrans??

Maurice was discussing the real-world terms under which the actors worked on the show, period.

If that's the case, it doesn't invalidate the entirety of my comment, does it? I think I saliently referenced both in and out of universe elements relevant to the contention.

Maurice can of course speak regarding what his own intent was.

My take is that matters of historical fact are just that: fact. If one's intent is to discuss history in the context of the available facts, then it doesn't do to put any sort of spin on it. My reading of what I've underlined in your post is that, with the idea in context of giving "short shrift" to cultural and in-universe concerns, you are saying that factual matters hold lesser priority than other possibly political concerns. My reading is that that would be attempting to put a spin on history and to rewrite it, and I don't believe that it has any place in the real-world discussion.

It also doesn't impact the in-universe concept of diversity. In-universe, we know those characters served on the starship, and that they were not discriminated against because of their skin color or ancestry.

The fact that the actors who played them didn't have star or costar status during the original series has nothing to do with that. It has more to do with getting work in show business. How show business dealt with television cast members who weren't leads, including those who were minorities, both in general and in relation to Star Trek, is its own subject.

 

[Pauln6]

The fact that the actors who played them didn't have star or costar status during the original series has nothing to do with that. It has more to do with getting work in show business. How show business dealt with television cast members who weren't leads, including those who were minorities, both in general and in relation to Star Trek, is its own subject.

This is very true. I also think that, over time, Nichols, Takei, and Koenig were more protective and proactive with their characters than Barrett. Takei was very vocal in requesting that Sulu be given more important things to do in story (not usually with much success). Chapel was dull and quite far from Majel's true personality. I don't think she really cared about the character as much as the franchise overall and by the time TNG had come along, Lwaxana was just more fun to play.

I think, due to the passage of years and her own personal story, Whitney came to view the official and unofficial cameos as something fun to do, something nice for her fans, and something that would help give her a bigger platform to tell her story about her recovery from addiction to help others but not something defining. I think she had great fun acting with Takei in STVI, Voyager, and her little cameo in the superb World Enough and Time was the icing on the cake for that story but overall, after TMP she measured Star Trek as something from the past.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

It's not your intent I realize, but doesn't this rendering of the importance of the other players, inevitably give short shrift to the very noteworthy role, culturally if not as actors, that the inclusion of Nichols and Takei in the cast meant at that time in TV history, as well as forwarding the narrative of the TOS era being enlightened in its unquestioned acceptance of diversity, at least as regards Terrans??

No, and I think you're missing the point: for a series structured around the lead ------ supporting player format, the diversity was in having the racial minorities there at all. Further, racial miorities were not the only supporting players to not be seen as important or enjoyed development as the Big Three, if you look at seemingly "major" characters (fan perception) such as Scott or Chekov. So, one can say TOS was being diverse, but you cannot ignore that the minority characters--as well as a white character like Scott--were not seen or developed on a matching level with the Big Three.

There's nothing incorrect or sinister about that.

Let's just take African American actors / characters for this example; in the case of other 1960s TV series where the minority characters happened to be intended leads from the start, you see a different treatment:

• I Spy - Alexander Scott
• Julia - Julia Baker
• Mission: Impossible - Barney Collier
• Mannix - Peggy Fair
• N.Y.P.D. (the 1st series using that title) - Jeff Ward
• Ironside - Mark Sanger
• Land of the Giants - Dan Erickson
• The Mod Squad - Linc Hayes

The characters listed above were--like their white counterparts--intended to be larger, main characters, so there's no misconception about their real importance to their respective series. They did not need revisionist fan or journalist screeds to turn the series into an even playing field "statement."

The problem is that TOS being set in the 23rd century framed itself as being a forward thinking vision of tomorrow--and it was, but at the end of the day, it was a TV series using the aforementioned lead ---- supporting player format, so even if Sulu and Uhura were white, there's no historical evidence concluding they would have been treated or developed in a more significant way (hence the reason Doohan and Koenig also complained about their imagined status).

 

[KirkPicard]

This makes the most sense. I liked Chapel in the series. It's a shame she's been lost as part of the ensemble. She's not even in the new movies.

She was mentioned in a dialog exchange between Kirk and Carol Marcus in "Into Darkness."

Kor

She has a line of in dialogue in the 2009 film as well.
MCCOY: Reaction to the vaccine. Dammit! Nurse Chapel, I need fifty cc's of cortazone.
CHAPEL: (offscreen) Yes, sir.

 

[Pauln6]

This makes the most sense. I liked Chapel in the series. It's a shame she's been lost as part of the ensemble. She's not even in the new movies.

She was mentioned in a dialog exchange between Kirk and Carol Marcus in "Into Darkness."

Kor

She has a line of in dialogue in the 2009 film as well.
MCCOY: Reaction to the vaccine. Dammit! Nurse Chapel, I need fifty cc's of cortazone.
CHAPEL: (offscreen) Yes, sir.

It does show a lack of respect for the character doesn't it? I was quite upset that Majel gave her blessing by voicing the computer before her death and yet Chapel was treated so shoddily in both movies. Not only did they do nothing to rectify her almost total absence from the first movie, they made it worse by, not just writing her out, but by implying that she left because Kirk shagged her and didn't call. Total lack of respect.

Luckily it's only implied. I can believe he might not know the name of every crewman but even I find it hard to believe that Kirk would not know the name of a crewman with whom he'd had sex. Of course it's possible she wasn't the only woman in the bed at the time...

 

[Nerys Myk]

Where is it said Kirk and Chapel had sex? Is that the writers talking or fans reading between the lines?

 

[Pauln6]

Where is it said Kirk and Chapel had sex? Is that the writers talking or fans reading between the lines?

It's only implied so it's completely up to the viewer's interpretation. It was not my personal assumption but many others jumped to that conclusion.

 

[Maurice]

My "intention" was to set the record straight that TOS was not and not intended to be an "ensemble" show.

1. Stars or "above the line" talent are in the opening titles. In TOS is was 2, then 3. In TNG it was (initially) 10. The former was intended to be a star vehicle, the latter intended to be an ensemble, as supported by...
2. Who gets to be a viewpoint character. On TOS only Kirk and Spock (and very rarely Bones) had stories built around them. No one else (Scott has problems in a couple of episodes, but he was never the viewpoint character). In an ensemble pretty much everyone would have an episode centered around their character as opposed to just having a bigger than average part. That's TNG to a T.

 

[indycar]

People get a kick out of seeing the whole mishpucha. They even had Kyle in STII. So the writers will find a way to get them in. In the last TNG movie, they didn't even pretend to have an excuse for Worf to be there -- they just said, "fuck it, Worf is here too."

The Homicide: Life on the Street reunion movie found a way to have everyone who was ever a series regular show up - even the dead ones.

But no Lt. Commander Kevin Riley..and darn even if he only appeared in 2 episodes-he sure made a favorable impression on me..too bad the character was never used again..

I don't know how accurate it is, but TV Tropes said the actor left to become a hippie.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

My "intention" was to set the record straight that TOS was not and not intended to be an "ensemble" show.

1. Stars or "above the line" talent are in the opening titles. In TOS is was 2, then 3. In TNG it was (initially) 10. The former was intended to be a star vehicle, the latter intended to be an ensemble, as supported by...
2. Who gets to be a viewpoint character. On TOS only Kirk and Spock (and very rarely Bones) had stories built around them. No one else (Scott has problems in a couple of episodes, but he was never the viewpoint character). In an ensemble pretty much everyone would have an episode centered around their character as opposed to just having a bigger than average part. That's TNG to a T.

Actually, of the minor characters, I think that Chapel came the closest to having an episode built around her, in "What Are Little Girls Made of?" One odd thing about it is that it's her "coming aboard" episode, even though she was already aboard ship in "The Naked Time," which was produced earlier. Another odd thing about it is that it plays like her character could have simply been for a guest star of the week. I wonder if that's what happened, if the script had originally involved a random character searching for her husband, and then Chapel was simply written into her place?

While it's not the whole episode, Chekov's relationship with his old Academy friend figured heavily in "The Way To Eden" and was integral to the story. Irina and Pavel get quite a bit of screen time, her rebelliousness is measured against his aspirations of, well, Herbertitude, and the major ending beat is their parting. Structurally, at least, that makes sense for an episode concerned, such as it was, with youth and generational divide.

By these respective cases, I think that Chapel and Chekov got closer to being viewpoint characters than Scotty ever really did.

 

[Nerys Myk]

The part was originally written for a different character, a guest star of the week. It was during the rewrites by Roddenberry that the character became Chapel.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

It's been suggested occasionally to of had Saavik be the traitor in TUC instead of Valeris.

I'm sure you're aware that was the original plan. They changed it to a new character when they couldn't get Kirstie Alley to reprise her role.

What if it had been Rand? We saw her as the transporter chief in TMP so she had cross trained away from yeoman, so place her at the nav panel. The betrayal of Kirk would have been huge, and the mind meld scene even more horrific.

I'm sure Grace Lee Whitney would have jumped at such a role.

I doubt she would've had the chops for it, though. Judging from the VOY episode she did some years later, Whitney had a pretty limited range as an actress.

If we couldn't have Kirstie Alley coming back as Saavik, I'm pretty glad we got Kim Cattrall playing Valeris. My only big problem with the character is that her being the brand-new crewman made the mystery pretty easy to guess. Saavik would've been MUCH more shocking and would've given the "A lie?"/"An error"/"An exaggeration"/"A choice" refrain with Spock much more resonance.

The Homicide: Life on the Street reunion movie found a way to have everyone who was ever a series regular show up - even the dead ones.

That was so beautifully done. Thank God they got everybody back together for that (Homicide had something like 20 castmembers total, IIRC).

 

[Melakon]

Where is it said Kirk and Chapel had sex? Is that the writers talking or fans reading between the lines?

The clue is in Kirk's line at the end, "She's staying with the ship."

To him, that means a chance to score. And she'd already seen the android duplicate naked, and said "They're exact!" Read into it what you will.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Something to do with Roddenbery being booted out? I always found it strange how Majel went on to play a different character later on. I couldn't imagine that happening with any of the other original cast members.

My Star Trek club, ASTREX, received regular letters from Gene & Majel, who were honorary members of our club, at the time the oldest Trek club in the southern hemisphere and the second oldest in the world. We received one when ST II was in pre-production that stated that Gene was disappointed with the script and was seriously considering not putting his name in the credits (he did end up with a credit) and Majel had told Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer she was not available to play Chapel, in support of Gene's removal as Executive Producer.

Her white medical scrubs from TMP were even modified for the film (collar changed and fabric Caduceus insignia replaced by the new metal one) just in case, and were worn by an extra in the sick bay scenes.

Her return in ST IV was due to an express invitation to play Commander Chapel by Leonard Nimoy (he did the same for Grace Lee Whitney in both ST III and ST IV. Whitney appeared in ST VI due to a show-of-hands survey at a big Trek convention; she narrowly beat Bruce Hyde as Riley, but some of her character's lines ended up going to Christian Slater, son of the casting director).

I don't know how accurate it is, but TV Tropes said the actor left to become a hippie.

Bruce Hyde became an academic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Hyde_%28academic%29

 

[Maurice]

By these respective cases, I think that Chapel and Chekov got closer to being viewpoint characters than Scotty ever really did.

I don't agree. Those stories were not driven by said characters any more than Scotty's were. They were simply reacting to the situation and/or guest star of the week. Did either Chekov or Chapel do anything which really affected the story? Both pined over lost loves They're reactive and not active characters.

Compare that to Bones in FTWIHAIHTS, wherein he decides to stay on Yonada, reads the Book, figures out that Spock can fix the faulty computer, and then led Kirk and Spock to it. He drives parts of the story and we see a lot of it through his eyes. That's the difference. That's a huge difference.