Yes, I clearly misunderstood that
. In my defense, I can just say that we are having a discussion about Rodenberry and casting couch in the Captain Marvel thread so....
Confirmed: Isis was NOT Victoria Vetri
- Thread starter Greg Cox
- Start date
. In my defense, I can just say that we are having a discussion about Rodenberry and casting couch in the Captain Marvel thread so....
I was just being a bastard. I have to keep it up or I lose my certification.
My guess is, if the show had gone to series, Isis would have been, as a cat, able to get into places, turn human, untie Seven or Lincoln, etc., then turn back to "cat" and slink out. Had they not given Seven a transporter this would have been an even more necessary skill.
Also, one wonders if, as a shapeshifter, Isis could adopt more than just the two forms. Maybe she could've impersonated people from time to time.
Although I just checked the series pitch document from 1967, and it doesn't even mention Isis, oddly enough. It mentions Seven, Roberta, and the key hardware like the servo, typewriter, computer, and transporter, but no shapeshifting catgirl. Which doesn't mean they wouldn't have included her -- the document talks about putting together a 20-minute network presentation film with scenes from the episode, including some (like the rocket sequence) that included Isis -- but it suggests they didn't necessarily consider her an indispensable part of the premise.
(The presentation film would've been cut to remove the Trek elements, and there's mention of a newly filmed scene of Seven explaining his basic mission to Roberta while they're in captivity. Though that would've been just for the pitch film and wouldn't necessarily mean that the series would've been out of continuity with the episode. But it might very well have been if it had gone forward, since continuity was a flexible thing back then.)
Although I just checked the series pitch document from 1967, and it doesn't even mention Isis, oddly enough. It mentions Seven, Roberta, and the key hardware like the servo, typewriter, computer, and transporter, but no shapeshifting catgirl. Which doesn't mean they wouldn't have included her -- the document talks about putting together a 20-minute network presentation film with scenes from the episode, including some (like the rocket sequence) that included Isis -- but it suggests they didn't necessarily consider her an indispensable part of the premise.
(The presentation film would've been cut to remove the Trek elements, and there's mention of a newly filmed scene of Seven explaining his basic mission to Roberta while they're in captivity. Though that would've been just for the pitch film and wouldn't necessarily mean that the series would've been out of continuity with the episode. But it might very well have been if it had gone forward, since continuity was a flexible thing back then.)
Nice story! The vast majority of "I met Shatner" stories from civilians end with the conclusion that he's a really nice guy. It was mostly the Doohan/Takei/Nichols/Koenig axis (and those who chose to believe them) that created a perception to the contrary, aided by a couple of feuds with Nimoy. I for one find it extremely interesting that no one, even in the #metoo era, has come forward with a story about Shatner acting inappropriately. I stand by the conclusion that he's a very nice guy and always has been.
I have a feeling that Shatner is his own worst enemy in some regards. He seems rather shy in general and even after all these years, still ill at ease with being a celebrity. And sometimes when you're shy, people can project things on to you and think you're stuck up. I wonder if a bit of this has gone on with the Shat at times.
He was apparently never the gregarious extrovert who'd make friends with a ton of people at work. I can relate to that a lot. And he was recently quoted somewhere explaining that he won't give an autograph when he's out with his grandchildren or whatever, because fifty people will swarm up and expect the same treatment.
Yeah. On the last season of Better Late Than Never Shatner explained that he only signs autographs as a part of a scheduled event because of that exact issue. This was in contrast to Henry Winkler, who would happily sign autographs any time. And yes, Winkler would get mobbed.
I have a couple of coworkers who are insufferable at the work and the nicest people outside. It's quite disorienting.
I conclude the opposite. LOL.
I conclude that Shatner is a bit of a jerk, doesn't have that much respect for the fans (is over it) or his lesser co-stars.
I'm thinking he wants to save his autograph writing so that he can get money for it. And why not? That doesn't make him evil. Just not a great guy- unlike the Fonz who's still pretty cool
I've been to a couple of conventions/comic cons etc and in one I heard two female guest stars interviewed and asked a question about Shatner and they said he was the perfect gentleman. But I've also heard from one female guest star at another convention that all the rumours about Shatner were true - unfortunately,.
This was all before the days of metoo and some of those actresses have passed I believe. Saying that there's nothing wrong with Shatner dating his co-stars (unless you were his wife I suppose) if he accepted No for an answer.
I want to like Shatner as a person I really do but none of you have convinced me
However nobody's ever related a story I've seen where Shatner's done anything truly terrible - at worst he just been obnoxious.
Not exactly. Google says William Shatner has a net worth of $100 million. The "money" he makes signing autographs at scheduled events is less than nothing to him. He does it to make people happy, and there's a monetary charge because a lot of people will line up for free stuff whether it means anything to them or not. Some jerks would tie him up signing things just so they could sell them on eBay.
And I'd like to see you spend your days off working for strangers who bug you in public when you're 87. Because your remaining time on this Earth isn't precious.
That said, yeah, anecdotally he has been gruff, abrupt, or less than nice with any number of individuals over the years. He seems to have saved most of his niceness for people he cares about
and been a jerk to many he doesn't. 
I got no problem with actors charging for their autographs. I don't begrudge any money actors make between gigs.
And no-ones forcing you to buy their autographs.
And I don't think the money Shatner makes is less than nothing. If he's getting $100 an autograph for 1000 people then thats $100000 and I don't begrudge him one dollar of it.
However although I have no problem with Shatner charging for autographs and refusing to sign in between gigs I don't think this makes him a "nice" guy or a bad guy. There's probably lots of actors who have the same policy.
However if Shatner only thinks he needs to be civil to people he cares about and can treat everyone else like crap then he's not a 'nice' guy in my definition. Not evil - just a jerk sometimes.
.-
And no-ones forcing you to buy their autographs.
And I don't think the money Shatner makes is less than nothing. If he's getting $100 an autograph for 1000 people then thats $100000 and I don't begrudge him one dollar of it.
However although I have no problem with Shatner charging for autographs and refusing to sign in between gigs I don't think this makes him a "nice" guy or a bad guy. There's probably lots of actors who have the same policy.
However if Shatner only thinks he needs to be civil to people he cares about and can treat everyone else like crap then he's not a 'nice' guy in my definition. Not evil - just a jerk sometimes.
.-
Not to imply anything about Shatner specifically, but the unfortunate thing is, a lot of predatory people are very good at seeming to be nice and kind and friendly, which is how they get away with it for so long. Just look at Bill Cosby, who had a reputation as one of the most wholesome and charming men in the country until the truth came out.
I read an article recently -- I can't remember where -- about a therapist working with domestic abusers in rehabilitation, asking them at one point how long they would've waited before they began abusing a new partner. The therapist described how chilling it was that the abusers discussed it and gamed it out, figuring out how long it would take and how they'd have to behave to make sure the women were solidly on the hook and emotionally dependent on them first, so that when they started the abuse at last, the women wouldn't just break up with them right away but would buy their excuses for the abuse and forgive them for it. It's not like they can't help themselves -- it's all very calculated and predatory, and the charming facade that convinces people "He couldn't possibly be a bad person" is an integral part of it.
Of course, people deserve the benefit of the doubt, but we should understand by now that even the worst abusers can have dozens of good friends and work associates who will swear up and down that they don't have a cruel or violent bone in their bodies. So we shouldn't automatically dismiss accusations against people like that.
It seems that this little bit of info wasn't included in the podcast
I think that kind of "We might pick you up for the series" talk is pretty much boilerplate in the industry, just part of being polite and/or keeping the actors motivated. There are no doubt thousands of actors who hear that and then never get called back again.
Last edited:
I know you're just spinning out some thoughts and seemingly-relevant conversational facts, but to be clear, Shatner is not suspected of being predatory. He's just been rude to some people over the years. "Imply" is an elastic concept, and I'm sure you don't want to be misunderstood.
You know what - never mind. Sometimes the best way to handle a ridiculous discussion is not to participate therein. Previous post deleted. Excuse me.
I'm with you, I don't have a dog in this race.
Similar threads
