early reviews from the UPI wire/september 1966
- Thread starter euphorik
- Start date
The Enterprise had waitresses??? That would have got it a fourth season.
Interesting that the second critique implies kids fighting to watch. An indirect foresight into demographic ratings measurement, perhaps?
BTW, what was the editor doing?
Hef(f)ner?
The greatest man who ever lived and they couldn't even spell his name right?
Bloody Fourth Estate bastiches....
BTW, what was the editor doing?
Hef(f)ner?
The greatest man who ever lived and they couldn't even spell his name right?
Bloody Fourth Estate bastiches....
Hef(f)ner?
The greatest man who ever lived and they couldn't even spell his name right?
i know what you mean. some of these reviews & news items from that period are even worse, gramatically AND factually. somewhere around here i have a clipping from august 1966, one of those "in and around hollywood" types of columns, describing SHARI LEWIS wearing an outfit so revealing on the set, that it necessitated a closed-set shoot. i'm guessing they meant sherry JACKSON. i'm *hoping* so, anyway...
here's another good one - july 27, 1966:
I believe Tarzan was Trek's lead-in during the first season, though I may be misremembering.
NBC tried to get a bit of a jump on the 1966-67 television season. They decided to preview three of their new series on Thursday, September 8, 1966--a week before the new season actually began. They showed Tarzan (even though its regular time slot was going to be on Friday), and they showed Star Trek and they showed The Hero. So for Trek's first season, it was only on this first premiere night that Tarzan was the lead in for Star Trek on NBC. Thereafter it was Daniel Boone.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Ouch! Rough reviews!
But nothing that wasn't in line with others I've read. I used to have a book that was nothing but Trek press clippings from TOS through the early 90s (IIRC). Reviewers have never been too kind to Trek.
But nothing that wasn't in line with others I've read. I used to have a book that was nothing but Trek press clippings from TOS through the early 90s (IIRC). Reviewers have never been too kind to Trek.
Would love to know what these reviewers think now.
They're dead and Trek is still alive; think about that.
Thanks for the laughs euphorik; the salt monster was never called a "thing," was it? I thought they called it a "creature." Mucho mejor.
I never missed Wild Wild West; Tarzan was no competition. Even though I loved Ron Ely earlier in "The Aquanauts."
Thanks for the laughs euphorik; the salt monster was never called a "thing," was it? I thought they called it a "creature." Mucho mejor.
I never missed Wild Wild West; Tarzan was no competition. Even though I loved Ron Ely earlier in "The Aquanauts."
It is frequently referred to as "creature" but Kirk does also call it a "thing" more than once in the scene where he confronts Crater:
"Can you recognize this thing When you see it?"
"This thing becomes wife, lover, best friend, wise man, fool, idol, slave."
"Have you learned to see this thing in whatever form it becomes?"
Whee! indeed! 
And I always assumed audiences in 1966 expected everything on TV to be nonsense. Was Star Trek really that much cornier than I Dream of Jeannie or sillier than Hogan's Heroes? Sure, there was Twilight Zone, but that was for the inty-lectuals.
I had no idea there was even a Tarzan TV series. Our house was all about Bonanza and The Wild Wild West. One of my sisters was a big Westerns fan, that might have been it.
And I always assumed audiences in 1966 expected everything on TV to be nonsense. Was Star Trek really that much cornier than I Dream of Jeannie or sillier than Hogan's Heroes? Sure, there was Twilight Zone, but that was for the inty-lectuals.
I had no idea there was even a Tarzan TV series. Our house was all about Bonanza and The Wild Wild West. One of my sisters was a big Westerns fan, that might have been it.
When I was around 4 or 5, I used to wake up in the middle of the night and watch reruns of the old Tarzan show. It was on one of those golden nights that I encountered TAS. Ah... bliss for a small child.
This was in the late 70's.
Actually, those reviews aren't all wrong. The Man Trap is a slow, somewhat tedious episode that does little to make the leads seem interesting or appealing. The "waitress" reaction is dead-on, as those miniskirts were always ridiculous as uniforms. These reviews just reinforce my opinion that The Man Trap was an awful choice for an opening episode, and NBC would have been far better served airing Where No Man Has Gone Before, which had the benefit of a strong character drama and no "bear" (to use the Outer Limits parlance).
I agree.
Several of you got a little chuckle about how "wrong they were!" but... Star Trek barely lasted 3 years. They were right.
Similar threads
