The Final "City"

[gottacook]

"Had Ellison submitted that script to a sci-fi anthology series, it would probably have gone unchanged": I agree with this. And the best decision made was the cutting of the entire Trooper storyline; he got in the way of the Kirk-and-Edith story and its resolution, and he wasn't missed (except by Ellison). Being edited, or having to edit your own work to fit one or another requirement, is never enjoyable - but at least you get paid.

Whatever else one may think about Robert Heinlein, he was quite a lot more gracious about such things, at least publicly. The original manuscript of The Puppet Masters (one of his earliest novels) ran about 100,000 words, and at an editor's request he himself shortened it to 75,000 words; this was the version published in 1951. Heinlein's widow caused the original longer version to be published in 1990. The 1951 version grabs you right from the beginning:

Were they truly intelligent? By themselves, that is? I don’t know and I don’t know how we can ever find out.
If they were not truly intelligent, I hope I never live to see us tangle with anything at all like them which is intelligent. I know who will lose. Me. You. The so-called human race.

For me it started too early on July 12, ’07 […]

By contrast, the “uncut” version immediately digresses in several directions:

Were they truly intelligent? By themselves, that is? I don’t know and I don’t know how we can ever find out. I’m not a lab man; I’m an operator.
With the Soviets it seems certain that they did not invent anything. They simply took the communist power-for-power’s-sake and extended it without any “rotten liberal sentimentality” as the commissars put it. On the other hand, with animals they were a good deal more than animal.
(It seems strange no longer to see dogs around. When we finally come to grips with them, there will be a few million dogs to avenge. And cats. For me, one particular cat.)
If they were not truly intelligent, I hope I never live to see us tangle with anything at all like them which is intelligent. I know who will lose. Me. You. The so-called human race.

For me it started much too early on July 12, ’07 […]

Heinlein wrote for pay and accepted that there would be editorial constraints (although he did lose such constraints later in his career - and in my opinion his books suffered as a result). Ellison, to my knowledge, has never explained why he thinks the alterations to his script weren't justifiable. Or, at least, one only hears his outrage.

 

[Maurice]

^^^I really totally utterly disagree about Trooper. He didn't "get in the way". He only appeared in two brief scenes, really drove home the desperation of people in the Depression, and he illustrated a point that some people matter in the cosmic scheme of things and other don't, no matter what they've sacrificed or how noble they are.

And, as has been said many times before, it appears Ellison started bitching about City mostly because Roddenberry and company told tall tales and lies about him and his work, which isn't analogous to the Heinlein situation at all.

 

[gottacook]

Do you know for a fact that Ellison went public with grievances about the editing of his script only because he thought he was being slandered? Maybe so, but I would have thought it went back to his original script winning the WGA award for that year, whereas the aired script won the Hugo. I had always thought that fact alone prompted him to begin proclaiming the virtues of his pure, true, original version.

(I find Ellison's introductions to his short stories more entertaining than the stories themselves - anyone else here agree?)

As for Trooper, he is put forth as important even in scenes where he doesn't appear, at least in the version I have (in the 1970s anthology Six Science Fiction Plays). As a character in a 50-minute Star Trek episode, however, he was superfluous, inasmuch as he wasn't missed by viewers who never knew he'd been scripted in the first place. This is the point I was trying to make with Heinlein/Puppet Masters concerning why editing can be a good thing.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

^^^A really totally utterly disagree about Trooper. He didn't "get in the way". He only appeared in two brief scenes, really drove home the desperation of people in the Depression, and he illustrated a point that some people matter in the cosmic scheme of things and other don't, no matter what they've sacrificed or how noble they are.

Exactly so. After reading Ellison's version (first in an anthology of sf screenplays edited by Roger Elwood back in the 1970s) I felt cheated by the version produced.

And, as has been said many times before, it appears Ellison started bitching about City mostly because Roddenberry and company told tall tales and lies about him and his work, which isn't analogous to the Heinlein situation at all.

Well, Ellison made his frustration with GR and Trek known fairly early on - I think, in fact, Gerrold may have acknowledged it in "The World Of Star Trek" - but more or less buried the hatchet with Roddenberry for some years after GR declined to replace Ellison on "The Starlost" (according to Ellison, Roddenberry told the studio involved that "the guy you ought to get for this is Harlan Ellison; you shouldn't have fucked him over.") Apparently Roddenberry angered Ellison again years later by concocting this story about "my Scotty dealing drugs" as part of his public performance.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Ellison wrote a good story, but it wasn't a Star Trek story.

Which says more about the blandness of Star Trek than it does about Ellison. When I read that script, and I saw the themes being attempted, I realized THAT'S the kind of Star Trek I always wanted. Sadly, almost none of it's ever gotten close to that level.

Damn straight. Ironically (or whatever it is that people actually mean when we misuse that word) even the broadcast version of "City" got closer to great than anything else Trek has done.

 

[Elder Knight]

It could have made a great two-hour episode of the show . . . but unfortunately, television was still a few years away from doing that sort of thing.

 

[Maurice]

Do you mean a two hour episode or a two parter?

 

[Elder Knight]

Preferably in one part, but either would have been interesting.

 

[Maurice]

This came up in another thread, but I'm going to address the same point here since it's germane to the discussion:

Regarding Kirk's conflict over letting Edith die, it's not as cut and dried in Ellison's draft as people say, as illustrated by the scene where Edith slips on the stairs. In the aired episode, Kirk catches her, then Spock chews Kirk out. In Ellison's first draft, the stairs scene is much more dramatic. Edith slips, Kirk reaches out but then closes his hand and lets her fall. She looks up, sees his extended but clenched hand. She seems to know he let her fall, and "a confused, hurt expression crosses her face." Spock is nowhere to be seen, and we see that Kirk does know why he's there, and he's capable of letting her die, but he's conflicted, and his letting her fall makes us more unsure as to whether or not he'll let it happen when the time comes...and moreover he's not sure.

Furthermore, it's more ambiguous than in the aired episode because in this script he doesn't know how she's going to die...just that she has to.

 

[Trekwatcher]

I read Ellison's version a few years ago and while I liked it, I felt that the aired version was superior for television. I know it is heresy in the eyes of some to say that, but I would agree with the topic starter and say, as I have said here before, that I think COTEOF is the best episode of Star Trek in any incarnation. Not sure they can ever top that one.

 

[Maurice]

In a thread elsewhere about Ellison that got closed I decided to look at his first draft script and do a breakdown of how much "bigger" it was than the aired episode, to see if there was any truth to the claims that he couldn't/wouldn't turn in a script that could be filmed on budget.

I'm cross-posting my analysis here because I think some of you might find it interesting.

Rough breakdown (revised) of Ellison's City 1st Draft:

CAST

1. KIRK
2. SPOCK
3. RAND
4. BECKWITH
5. LEBEQUE
6. EDITH KEELER
7. TROOPER
8. 1ST GUARDIAN
9. RENEGADE (ON CONDOR) (4 lines)
10. CREWMAN (1 line)
11. ORATOR
12. JANITOR (9 lines)
13. COOK (8 lines)
14. TRANSPORTER CHIEF (1 line)
15. VOICE OF TRICORDER

That's 15 speaking parts. The aired episode had 12 listed on imdb. Two of them have only one line each, and would've been the first thing cut out by any Producer worth his salt vampire.
​

NON SPEAKING PARTS/EXTRAS

• 5 SECURTY MEN (led by Crewman, above)
• GUARDIANS 2 AND 3
• RENEGADES IN TRANSPORTER & CORRIDOR (number not specified)
• 7 POOR MEN ON STREET
• MEN ACCOMPANYING TROOPER (seen in shadow)
• 4 SALVATION ARMY TYPES/MUSICIANS
• MISC. PEDESTRIANS

Ellison doesn't call for any big crowd scenes. For New York he suggests groups of about 6-7 men, and even call out for how the same extras could be reused in several scenes (the men who chase Kirk and Spock become the muscle backing up Trooper). The aired episode has similar numbers of men in small crowds.
​

SETS

ENTERPRISE

• BRIDGE
• KIRK'S CABIN
• BECKWITH'S CABIN (REDRESS OF KIRK'S)
• CORRIDOR
• TRANSPORTER

The aired episode used three of these, leaving out only the cabin set and its redress.
​

GUARDIANS' PLANET

• FLAT EXPANSE
• GUARDIANS' PLATEAU

The aired episode had one location where the Guardian was.
​

1930 EARTH

EXTERIORS

• NEW YORK STREET (VARIOUS SPOTS)
• ROOFTOP
• ALLEY
• BACKSTREET

INTERIORS

• BASEMENT
• EDITH'S APARTMENT
• TENAMENT STAIRWELL & VESTIBULE
• RESTAURANT KITCHEN
• LIMBO SET (BLACK W/ LIGHT FX)

The 30's Earth interior sets are a similar number to the ones in the aired episode. For the episode exteriors they shot around the Forty Acres backlot in various places, which could just as easily served to cover the setups here.
​

VISUAL EFFECTS

• ENTERPRISE FLYBYS (STOCK)
• TRANSPORTER EFFECT (3)
• THE CITY (of the title)
• VORTEX EFFECT (Ellison's description: "Construct it as you choose.")
• HISTORICAL STOCK FOOTAGE SUPERIMPOSED
• TIME VORTEX TRANSITIONS (4)
• PHASER BEAMS (4)
• PHASER DEMATERIALIZATION (2)
• TIME TRANSITION EFFECT (2) (OPTICAL PRINTER)
• BECKWITH'S FATE VFX

This is the only part of the script that appears significantly bigger than what was aired. Some of the above might've been accomplished on set as practical SFX, such as a hanging in miniature, rear-projection, etc., ergo it's fuzzy what would have been practical SFX vs. VFX. Ellison's not going overboard on these. In fact, the first time the transporter is used, his script indicates that we hear the transporter through a sealed door, not see the beaming effect at all. Cheap.
​

THE GUARDIANS
As to the Guardians, they are described as nine feet tall, terribly old (makeup) with tall mitred headpieces and shapeless robes. They're not giant talking statues. They would have been done by standing the actor and extras on boxes, making them up, and draping their robes over what they were standing on. The script calls for no ruins, no physical structure, just a spot where the vortex effect appears. This could easily have been done on the planet set with their stock rocks.

FIRST DRAFT SUMMARY
The first draft would have been too expensive to do under Trek's budget as was, but not on an order of magnitude. Not even double the number of elements from what we got.

By Ellison's second draft he'd already tossed Beckwith, LeBeque and the Guardians, and thrown out the whole "ship in danger" crap Roddenberry had asked for, losing the Renegade and his pirate crew, and several associated transporter effects. The Guardian already became a disembodied voice. He'd even substituted McCoy as the catalyst. I don't have access to that full draft, but unless he added more to that version than the first (doubtful), it likely would have been even cheaper to film than the above.

Make of all this what you will.

 

[Shatmandu]

I can see the merits of both versions.

The final episode does carry a lot of impact, and not just on Edith Keeler's skull and torso.

Joe, bleedin'

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Keeler's torso made its own kind of impact.

 

[Captain Robert April]

The one thing that Ellison never quite got with having Spock save the day and Kirk being indecisive at best and willing to chuck the whole universe for the sake of his own love life at worst, is that while he was gonna be off doing something else after this thing aired, we'll still be back here having to live with these guys. And it would be tough to hold Kirk in the same regard in the next week if just last week we saw him willing to tell the world he knew to get stuffed so that he could go off and make whoopie with Joan Collins.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

The one thing that Ellison never quite got with having Spock save the day and Kirk being indecisive at best and willing to chuck the whole universe for the sake of his own love life at worst, is that while he was gonna be off doing something else after this thing aired, we'll still be back here having to live with these guys. And it would be tough to hold Kirk in the same regard in the next week if just last week we saw him willing to tell the world he knew to get stuffed so that he could go off and make whoopie with Joan Collins.

Would it?

It might have made Captain Kirk even more relatable and garner more sympathy for the weight of his weekly choices. The fearless captain is still human with all the baggage that entails, who is prone to making a mistake every once in awhile and giving in to that human need to be loved.

It wasn't just "whoopie," it was love. As Spock says in the original script, "No woman was ever loved as much, Jim. Because no woman was ever
offered the universe for love."

And it's a television mentality to underestimate what the audience might be able to handle. Dozens of shows, books and films have characters who do "despicable" things yet still gain the sympathy or adoration of the audience.

To use another SFTV show as an example. John Sheridan did some rather questionable things in Babylon 5 -- e.g. manipulated Taila to scan the Shadows without her consent; held Morden without charges; used altered telepaths, once again without consent, as a means to disable the Earth fleet; and said, "Get the hell out of our galaxy." Yet it didn't change my regard for the character nor did it for many others who watched and enjoyed Babylon 5. Okay that last one, I nearly wanted to strangle Sheridan.

By the time COTEF aired, the audience had nearly an entire season to attach themselves to Kirk and Spock. One mistake or inaction by Kirk wouldn't have destroyed him or his "relationship" with the audience.

 

[MoonlightSinatra]

Does anyone have a link to the original script?

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Not the same as reading the original, but a detailed synopsis is here:

http://www.fastcopyinc.com/orionpress/articles/city.htm

 

[Maurice]

^^^Not at ALL the same. You don't get the power of Ellison's words.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

By the time COTEF aired, the audience had nearly an entire season to attach themselves to Kirk and Spock. One mistake or inaction by Kirk wouldn't have destroyed him or his "relationship" with the audience.

That's a real good point. Someone thought up the "Kirk's character/Trek would have been destroyed" canard against Ellison's superior script decades ago, and it's been repeated defensively - with little variation and no real thought - ever since.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

By the time COTEF aired, the audience had nearly an entire season to attach themselves to Kirk and Spock. One mistake or inaction by Kirk wouldn't have destroyed him or his "relationship" with the audience.

That's a real good point. Someone thought up the "Kirk's character/Trek would have been destroyed" canard against Ellison's superior script decades ago, and it's been repeated defensively - with little variation and no real thought - ever since.

I've spent the last two years in writing workshops as part of my degree program and had this argument of what the audience can and cannot accept in a character.

If the writer or what-have-you builds the relationship early, say in the first few chapters or episodes, than the reader/viewer is more than willing to go into the darker places with that character. The character can take unexpected and even questionable turns, and nothing is damaged. The relationship of reader/viewer remains. And in the case of Trek, the audience has already been on this ship for a good spell before COTEF.

Kirk's reputation as a hero is a bullshit hand played by those who would prefer their heroes as one notes, two-dimensional beings who automatically, almost by rote, do the right thing.

One of the things that I recently enjoyed about DC's Infinite Crisis is that Superman (Earth-2) makes a mistake because of his love for Lois Lane. As Wonder Woman (Earth-2) points out to Wonder Woman (Earth Zero), "everybody makes mistakes, even a Superman."

Making a mistake doesn't make these characters any less a hero. For me, it makes them even more because they have to overcome something which in the end makes them stronger for having done so.

Kirk makes a mistake in one episode but continues as captain, not letting it stop him from doing his duty. That makes him a hero even more because he has to learn to live with his mistake and does not give up. Much like he has to in TWOK and suffer the consequences of his mistake. "I got caught with my britches down" and "We're only alive because I knew something about this ship that he didn't."

Not to derail the thread, but it's also why I can accept that Kirk isn't the shinning armor knight in the Abrams movie. He has something to overcome and which in the end, hopefully, leads him to being the heroic Captain we all know and love.

One of the things that I admire about Ellison's script and his work in general is that, like me, he is interested in the inconsistencies in human beings. The genius of his script is that the villain becomes, in a way, the hero and the show's hero can't make the "right" choice because of his feelings.