Harlan Ellison COTEF Lawsuit Gains Momentum

[EEE]

There is another paragraph in the HE book that I'd like to address. I don't have the book here so it's paraphrased. He quoted Gene in a speech talking about David Gerrold, that he had hired him for Trek. The speech was during the 2nd or 3rd season of TNG, saying he never gave them anything they could shoot. Harlan then comments about this and says "What about 'Trouble With Tribbles'?". Gene was not talking about TOS, but TNG. Now whether David submitted anything that was shootable is not what I'm commenting on here, just that Harlan took this quote either out of context, or did not know what that Gene was talking about hiring DG to work on TNG. As far as I know, the only story DG gave in for TNG was "Blood & Fire" which was rejected for whatever reason of the day then, but that's what Gene was talking about.

How many other quotes or memories did Harlan mistake or was confused about in the book? It makes it suspect, at least somewhat.

My recollection of the book was the diatribe at the beginning swore all the cast and whatnot's would support his story being better. All but one just said it was a good story.

But honestly, after reading the diatribe, I couldn't get myself to read the actual story. While HE may be completely correct in his latest lawsuit, I can't help finding myself hoping he loses. Out of bad kharma if nothing else...

“I have no love for Paramount,” said Harlan Ellison, in an interview with Maggie Thompson, printed in Sci-Fi Universe in June 1995. “Paramount is not a studio…steeped in ethical behavior...The fanatics who feed off that whole money-making Trek franchise, who live it and breathe it, who don't merely watch the show, are to me the most pathetic creatures in the world; suckers being mulcted by venal Paramount, publishers of garbage novels with stock characters, hustlers and inheritors of Roddenberry's scam, and cult-like gurus who prey on Star Trek obsessives and Trekkies and Trekkers and Treksters and Trekoids and Treknoids and Trekiloids and Diploids and Dippies. They're like those sad couch potatoes who worship at the TV altars of The 700 Club and Home Shopping Channel, which are one and the same, whether the viewers are being fleeced in the name of Consumerism or Jesus. They are…absolutely the most pathetic creatures in the world. I mean, they talk about a TV series as if it were real life. They wear damned Star Trek uniforms. People change their names so they have the same names as the characters. Doesn't anyone else see the resemblance this all bears to the Branch Davidians or the Jonestown cults?”

 

[Maurice]

You can find Ellison annoying, fine. You can accuse him of being childish or petty or what have you. But the thing about the man that matters is that he does not bend over and take it from the Hollywood machine like so many others. You all may love the televised "City", you all may hate Ellison's first draft, and you may find him personally reprehensible. But this lawsuit is about fairness to writers and their creations, corporations living up to their contracts, and the Writers Guild doing its job. And if fans actually care about the people who make the entertainments they enjoy so much, they should be supporting efforts like this, not pillorying the writers, etc., who are fighting for what their contracts mandate.

Hell, HE himself allows that some people may legitmately prefer the filmed version, he says so in his intro. That does not change the fact that GR screwed him then and Paramount, by continuing to wring cash out of his creation while making sure he gets none of it, is screwing him now.

But it's not like they screwed HE. It's the way the business was run back then (and to some extent now). It's not like they said, "oh, it Ellison. Let's pay him for a script and never give residuals like we give the other writers".

It's been pointed out many times that what Ellison' contract with Desilu said and what rights he retained are not known, so to brush it off as "the way business was run" is probably no a supportable statement. We don't know the contracts OR the law here. I'm not comfortable with opinion standing in for fact in a case like this.

Furthermore, as with the recent Superman copyright issues, the question if work for hire agreements of certain sorts are even valid may come into play.

 

[Noname Given]

I've met Harlan in person; and even had the opportunity to drive him to the airport from a Worldcon. Lets just say he (like a lot of 'celebreties' and in Con circles he certainly is one); has a 'public' persona; and a 'private' on and they are very different from each other.

So did you have a positive or negative experience?

Positive. It was an interesting discussion.

 

[Kelso]

“I have no love for Paramount,” said Harlan Ellison, in an interview with Maggie Thompson, printed in Sci-Fi Universe in June 1995. “Paramount is not a studio…steeped in ethical behavior...The fanatics who feed off that whole money-making Trek franchise, who live it and breathe it, who don't merely watch the show, are to me the most pathetic creatures in the world; suckers being mulcted by venal Paramount, publishers of garbage novels with stock characters, hustlers and inheritors of Roddenberry's scam, and cult-like gurus who prey on Star Trek obsessives and Trekkies and Trekkers and Treksters and Trekoids and Treknoids and Trekiloids and Diploids and Dippies. They're like those sad couch potatoes who worship at the TV altars of The 700 Club and Home Shopping Channel, which are one and the same, whether the viewers are being fleeced in the name of Consumerism or Jesus. They are…absolutely the most pathetic creatures in the world. I mean, they talk about a TV series as if it were real life. They wear damned Star Trek uniforms. People change their names so they have the same names as the characters. Doesn't anyone else see the resemblance this all bears to the Branch Davidians or the Jonestown cults?”

I don't see anything objectionable or offensive in that quote. Anyone who does might be taking themselves (or life in general) a bit too seriously.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

cult-like gurus who prey on Star Trek obsessives and Trekkies and Trekkers and Treksters and Trekoids and Treknoids and Trekiloids and Diploids and Dippies. They're like those sad couch potatoes who worship at the TV altars of The 700 Club and Home Shopping Channel, which are one and the same, whether the viewers are being fleeced in the name of Consumerism or Jesus.

Damn, that dude is funny.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

As a story, Harlan's version is excellent.

As a Trek episode, I don't believe it would have worked...

Maybe, maybe not.

...and the filmed version is just as excellent.

Nope. Not even close. And the filmed version is my all-time favorite Star Trek episode.

 

[Jan]

It's been pointed out many times that what Ellison' contract with Desilu said and what rights he retained are not known, so to brush it off as "the way business was run" is probably no a supportable statement. We don't know the contracts OR the law here. I'm not comfortable with opinion standing in for fact in a case like this.

Not quite. We do know what part of the Writer's Guild Minimum Basic Agreement was in effect at the time and that it's the basis for the lawsuit. The formal complaint filed with the court is here. And the key clause begins on page 4, the paragraph that begins:

12. Pled in haec verba, the 1960 MBA, as amended by the 1966
Amendment, provides in relevant part in Article XVIII (N) on page 27:
“ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION FOR CERTAIN USES OF SERIAL OR EPISODIC​

SERIES MATERIAL[:]

Note that it's the Writer's Guild Minimum Basic Agreement. That means it can be negotiated...upward.

Jan

 

[EEE]

“I have no love for Paramount,” said Harlan Ellison, in an interview with Maggie Thompson, printed in Sci-Fi Universe in June 1995. “Paramount is not a studio…steeped in ethical behavior...The fanatics who feed off that whole money-making Trek franchise, who live it and breathe it, who don't merely watch the show, are to me the most pathetic creatures in the world; suckers being mulcted by venal Paramount, publishers of garbage novels with stock characters, hustlers and inheritors of Roddenberry's scam, and cult-like gurus who prey on Star Trek obsessives and Trekkies and Trekkers and Treksters and Trekoids and Treknoids and Trekiloids and Diploids and Dippies. They're like those sad couch potatoes who worship at the TV altars of The 700 Club and Home Shopping Channel, which are one and the same, whether the viewers are being fleeced in the name of Consumerism or Jesus. They are…absolutely the most pathetic creatures in the world. I mean, they talk about a TV series as if it were real life. They wear damned Star Trek uniforms. People change their names so they have the same names as the characters. Doesn't anyone else see the resemblance this all bears to the Branch Davidians or the Jonestown cults?”

I don't see anything objectionable or offensive in that quote. Anyone who does might be taking themselves (or life in general) a bit too seriously.

Likening, what is a [harmless hobby / collection / harmless mental masturbation] for many and/or most, to a mass suicide tragedy is not objectionable to you?

 

[trevanian]

I don't see anything objectionable or offensive in that quote. Anyone who does might be taking themselves (or life in general) a bit too seriously.

Likening, what is a [harmless hobby / collection / harmless mental masturbation] for many and/or most, to a mass suicide tragedy is not objectionable to you?

It's the MINDSET, don't you get it? And those who are always willing to exploit such mindsets.

You perhaps remind me of somebody who wrote a letter criticizing Ellison's years-later pan of Donner's THE OMEN, where he mentioned that the orgasmic delight of a couple in the audience at witnessing David Warner's beheading, which made him feel as low about humanity as anything since the camps during ww2. The letter-writer accused Ellison of hyperbole, as there could be no basis for comparing a mega-atrocity with a couple of excited patrons. The writer missed the point that witnessing this generated that level of feeling in Ellison, not that he was saying they were equivalent.

 

[EEE]

I don't see anything objectionable or offensive in that quote. Anyone who does might be taking themselves (or life in general) a bit too seriously.

Likening, what is a [harmless hobby / collection / harmless mental masturbation] for many and/or most, to a mass suicide tragedy is not objectionable to you?

It's the MINDSET, don't you get it?

EXACTLY!!! They are COMPLETELY different for many and/or most!

 

[Kelso]

Likening, what is a [harmless hobby / collection / harmless mental masturbation] for many and/or most, to a mass suicide tragedy is not objectionable to you?

Not in the least. It is pretty funny, though.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Likening, what is a [harmless hobby / collection / harmless mental masturbation] for many and/or most, to a mass suicide tragedy is not objectionable to you?

Not in the least. It is pretty funny, though.

Ellison's 1976 appearence on NBC's Tomorrow show along with the supporting cast of the original Star Trek is online at YouTube. Talk about funny stuff...

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ellison+tomorrow+trek&search_type=&aq=f

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Gotta love the clouds of cigarette smoke.

They really start mixing it up in part 5. Indeed, good friends Koenig and Ellison mix it up.

EDIT: It doesn't bother me now but if I saw this when I was in my teens I'd have been tempted to put my foot through the picture tube.

 

[trevanian]

Gotta love the clouds of cigarette smoke.

They really start mixing it up in part 5. Indeed, good friends Koenig and Ellison mix it up.

EDIT: It doesn't bother me now but if I saw this when I was in my teens I'd have been tempted to put my foot through the picture tube.

I remember staying up late as a teenager to watch this (even audio-taped it) and having realizations as Ellison and Doohan bickered a bit: namely, that Ellison was making some good points (not a HUGE surprise, I'd already read THE GLASS TEAT), and that Doohan, even though he looked magnificent with the beard, was throwing around the 'love' phraseology so indiscriminately that I couldn't take him seriously.

I picked up a videotape of it about 20 years ago, and I trot it out on occasion. Best joke I recall was an ex-girlfriend remarking that the smoke was so heavy they could have just keyed it in on top of the VGER model footage and not had to use as much of Trumbull's stuff in TMP.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

They really start mixing it up in part 5. Indeed, good friends Koenig and Ellison mix it up.

Oh, the reactions to Ellison's "Star Trek is a cop show" are something.

 

[Brutal Strudel]

It is an unfair comparison. Star Trek in none of its incarnations has come anywhere near the quality of Hill Street Blues, Homicide or The Wire.

It does make one wonder: how is it that Ellison is still such a huge part of Trek? I think Ellison hits the nail on the head when he compares Trek to The 700 Club. In the Star Trek religion, Elllison is Lucifer to Roddenberry's God, right down to the ambiguous relationship post-Fall. Just as God invited Satan into His throne room and suggested he have a go at Job, GR invited HE into Paramount and suggested he have a go at TMP.

 

[Captain Robert April]

It's definitely a strange day when I find myself largely in agreement with Dennis....

 

[Brutal Strudel]

I find myself agreeing with Dennis a lot anymore--we've always held similar political views. (Love the new avatar.)

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I find myself agreeing with Dennis a lot anymore--we've always held similar political views. (Love the new avatar.)

Thanks. It's getting a little past its sell-by date, though...as her political celebrity is, as well.

Well the Tomorrow segment is from pre-"Hill Street" days. Cop shows have evolved a lot. But I agree with you about Trek in general in that respect - I never got the praise for the sophistication of DS9, except by assuming that fans were choosing to compare it to no network drama or programming besides other Star Trek. So much other stuff at the time, like NYPD Blue (early seasons) was so gripping and so gritty and so well-done...

I can't find it online although I'm sure that at least some of it is...but not long after this Ellison/Trek guys segment Snyder did an entire show with Ellison as his only guest. And at the beginning they're both having a lot of fun and Ellison is making Tom just a little nervous...but three quarters of the way through Snyder's nerves are clearly frayed.

And then, a night or two after that, Snyder read a sampling of viewer response to the HE segment while a maniacal laugh - Harlan's - issued from behind the camera.

Late night TV was fun in the 70s, and Snyder was an original for sure. The night that Bob Haldeman was cancelled as his guest by NBC News - because they were touting an "exclusive interview" with him concerning his book about the Nixon White House, to air several days later - Snyder went on a rant against the news division, the parent company et al and wound up with the statement "I just think it's sad that we're cutting each others' throats trying to get an interview with a convicted felon who's hawking a book on his way to the slammer."

 

[Brutal Strudel]

DS9 is about the closest we'll ever get to Star Fleet Blues but that's not terribly close at all, sadly. Still my favorite of the spin-offs, though.