The Cage final cut?

[J.T.B.]

Had (what we now call) "The Cage" been cut for broadcast when NBC rejected it or had it not gotten that far yet? The extended version on disc is about 71 minutes, is that a little short for a 90 minute slot? Most 90-minute TV I've seen from that era runs around 75 minutes without commercials. Thanks in advance.

 

[seigezunt]

I seem to recall that it had not reached that stage.

 

[GNDN18]

Over at startrekhistory.com they have images and dialogue from trims and deleted scenes. Flybys of the E are noticeably absent from the final film, too. I don’t think it would have been too difficult to pad the pilot out to 75 minutes if that was all the stakeholders had left to try and recoup the cost.

Stretching it to movie-length for European distribution might have been a bit much, though.

 

[alchemist]

I don’t think it would have been too difficult to pad the pilot out to 75 minutes if that was all the stakeholders had left to try and recoup the cost.

I concur; the first pilot could have been expanded to at least 75 minutes if they had put in all the usable material that had been left on the cutting room floor. Many scenes were trimmed and, off the top of my head, one scene was deleted in its entirety. Of course, then there's the issue of quality...

 

[Tenacity]

Stretching it to movie-length for European distribution might have been a bit much, though.

Would the studio have agreed to film extra scenes (meaning extra money) in order to increase it's run time?

A couple more Pike fantasies could have been made without the majority of the cast.

 

[Kor]

Technically, a 70-minute production could have been shown as a feature film. In practice, most were longer than that.

Kor

 

[Sir Rhosis]

If memory serves, GR did attempt to entice Hunter back to film more scenes to expand it to the 80-90 minute range for theatrical release overseas, but Hunter turned him down.

Anybody remember where this comes from?

Sir Rhosis

 

[Harvey]

If memory serves, GR did attempt to entice Hunter back to film more scenes to expand it to the 80-90 minute range for theatrical release overseas, but Hunter turned him down.

Anybody remember where this comes from?

Sir Rhosis

There are memos that exist to that effect. I think Inside Star Trek mentions this, as well.

 

[Maurice]

The fact that they felt it was necessary to spend more money to bring Hunter back to film extra material is pretty conclusive indicator that they didn't feel they had enough extra footage to achieve an acceptable theatrical release.

 

[J.T.B.]

Thanks a lot for the replies and info. I guess it's correct to say we don't know today exactly what the version presented to NBC consisted of?

 

[tomswift2002]

Technically, a 70-minute production could have been shown as a feature film. In practice, most were longer than that.

Kor

Why 70 minutes? A lot "B" movies ran just over 60 minutes (just off the top of my head, the 1945 "B" movie "Dick Tracy Detective" ran 61 minutes, and Superman and the Mole Men ran 58 minutes in its Theatrical form.

 

[Harvey]

Why 70 minutes? A lot "B" movies ran just over 60 minutes (just off the top of my head, the 1945 "B" movie "Dick Tracy Detective" ran 61 minutes, and Superman and the Mole Men ran 58 minutes in its Theatrical form.

Mission Impossible Vs. The Mob was 110 minutes. From what I can tell, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. movies were of a similar length. I suspect that the theatrical market by 1965 didn't support the much shorter B-film, due to the competition of television and the forced divestment of theater chains from the studio system in 1948.

That's just a theory, though. I'd have to do more research on the subject before I would state it with more certainty.

 

[Maurice]

Also, theaters changed their booking practices and double bills and all the cartoons, newsreels, and other interstitials went away. You can have shorter features where there's a program of films. When you;re competing against TV you're not going to screen as a single-bill something barely longer than a TV episode.

 

[alchemist]

The fact that they felt it was necessary spend more money to bring Hunter back to film extra material is pretty conclusive indicator that they didn't feel they had enough extra footage to achieve an acceptable theatrical release.

I think there was enough extra footage that an acceptable theatrical release could have been created. According to David Alexander on pages 225-226 of his book, Star Trek Creator, Roddenberry wrote this to Jeff Hunter (on April 5, 1965) in an attempt to lure him back:

"You will recall I mentioned to you during shooting that I felt there were things more important to both of us than budget. One result of this is we have an enormous investment in a project which can now be recouped in only one of two ways: (1) expansion of current footage via stock and long cutting into an 'acceptable' motion picture, or (2) one day or two of shooting an additional action opening which can result in a fast, tightly cut, exciting film release. Again, the second choice seems best for all reputations involved."

Clearly, Roddenberry felt that it would have been better to shoot additional footage, but he acknowledged that there was enough filmed material to make something work.

 

[Christopher]

Mission Impossible Vs. The Mob was 110 minutes. From what I can tell, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. movies were of a similar length

The UNCLE films I've seen shot additional material, both to increase running time and to add sex and violence for overseas theatrical release. There's one film, One Spy Too Many (based on the oddly article-less "Alexander the Greater Affair") where they brought back guest star David Sheiner (in an unconvincing bald cap to approximate his shaved head in the original 2-parter) to shoot a new, violent under-credits action sequence of his character breaking into a military base that he then broke into again at the start of the reused episode footage. They also added new scenes with Yvonne Craig as an UNCLE communications officer who was inserted to flirt with Napoleon Solo for a few moments every time he called headquarters. It did cut out a couple of scenes from the 2-parter, though, so it may not have been that much longer.

The feature version of the pilot episode had a whole new subplot filmed for it, and that footage was later repackaged into a separate episode of the show, with a bit of voice dubbing to avoid reusing a character name from the pilot, and with a new B plot added to bring it to episode length. Which means that the full film version must've been shorter than 2 single episodes in that case.

 

[Maurice]

I think there was enough extra footage that an acceptable theatrical release could have been created. According to David Alexander on pages 225-226 of his book, Star Trek Creator, Roddenberry wrote this to Jeff Hunter (on April 5, 1965) in an attempt to lure him back:

"You will recall I mentioned to you during shooting that I felt there were things more important to both of us than budget. One result of this is we have an enormous investment in a project which can now be recouped in only one of two ways: (1) expansion of current footage via stock and long cutting into an 'acceptable' motion picture, or (2) one day or two of shooting an additional action opening which can result in a fast, tightly cut, exciting film release. Again, the second choice seems best for all reputations involved."

Clearly, Roddenberry felt that it would have been better to shoot additional footage, but he acknowledged that there was enough filmed material to make something work.

Well, yes and no.

Roddenberry was writing to Hunter, and anyone who's ever written that kind of business letter knows that you never admit you cannot do the job without the person you are trying to persuade, because that gives them extra negotiating muscle and power. Fact is, they did settle on terms with Hunter but nothing ever came of the idea.

 

[Tomalak]

I'm guessing the "action opening" would have been the battle on Rigel?

 

[Sir Rhosis]

^^^My thoughts as well. I also seem to recall an earlier scripted scene where Pike kicks a crewman off the Enterprise for murdering a peaceful alien, simply because it appeared ugly to his prejudiced eyes, or something of that nature.

Sir Rhosis

 

[Maurice]

^^^My thoughts as well. I also seem to recall an earlier scripted scene where Pike kicks a crewman off the Enterprise for murdering a peaceful alien, simply because it appeared ugly to his prejudiced eyes, or something of that nature.

Sir Rhosis

It's certainly in one of the treatments.

 

[GNDN18]

^^^My thoughts as well. I also seem to recall an earlier scripted scene where Pike kicks a crewman off the Enterprise for murdering a peaceful alien, simply because it appeared ugly to his prejudiced eyes, or something of that nature.

Sir Rhosis

I do, too, but I don’t remember where. @alchemist might know. I think Pike’s hat figured in that scene.