No, because they weren't reviewing a franchise, they were reviewing a rather tepid opening episode.
early reviews from the UPI wire/september 1966
- Thread starter euphorik
- Start date
Nope, they were not; they were reviewing the series based on an episode; it's plain in the clippings. And they were incorrect. We may chuckle away.
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
I agree The Man Trap was a poor choice and Where No Man Has Gone Before would have been an interesting first show to air. I know they didn't want to start people off with the crew from WNMHGB and then have things change the next week, but look at it this way: they were going to have to air the pilot episode sometime anyway, because burying it would have been too costly. Why air it fifth or sixth (as they did) and confuse the audience after your season is underway? Why not air it first? It's a terrific pilot, and a good beginning.
I also think The Naked Time would have been a good first show. Anyway, I think it's pretty clear NBC dropped the ball when it came to debuting Star Trek.
-jwb-
jwbraun.com
I agree The Man Trap was a poor choice and Where No Man Has Gone Before would have been an interesting first show to air. I know they didn't want to start people off with the crew from WNMHGB and then have things change the next week, but look at it this way: they were going to have to air the pilot episode sometime anyway, because burying it would have been too costly. Why air it fifth or sixth (as they did) and confuse the audience after your season is underway? Why not air it first? It's a terrific pilot, and a good beginning.
I also think The Naked Time would have been a good first show. Anyway, I think it's pretty clear NBC dropped the ball when it came to debuting Star Trek.
-jwb-
jwbraun.com
Last edited:
The biggest problem with Man Trap was conceptual...Kirk didn't try to save or understand the Vampire first...he tried to KILL it! He didn't treat the Horta that way!! Otherwise, the episode is pretty decent...starts out as a pretty good allegory about extinction and then blows it. If the reviewers had been paying attention, they may have realized the REAL faults with the episode...because anywhere up till the 1960s, there was nothing quite like ST!!
RAMA
RAMA
According to The Justman/Solow book "Inside Star Trek - The Real Story" they didn't pick WNMHGB as the premiere because it was "too expository." Honestly, I never felt that way. There was no expositon at all, really. We were introduced to the characters through their situation, and if not for the changes in styles, actors, and sets, they could have dropped this one anywhere in the run. I rather felt this one was the perfect opening to the series. It had interesting sci-fi concepts, an intelligent script, great performances, exciting effects sequences, and a good balance of ship and planet scenes. It really was a good showcase for the format and characters. It also starts Kirk off on a good note, being warm hearted toward his crew and friend, yet making a huge sacrifice to save everyone. Better than being a monster hunter in Man Trap and having Spock yell while punching Nancy Crater a half dozen times. And if they had paid attention to Nancy as McCoy and offered salt without tricks, and communicated with the creature, they my very well have been able to live in peace with it. Professor Crater obviously was able to supply it with enough salt until he ran low. Killing it was really unnecessary.
Anyway, despite Justman and Solow's claims, WNMHGB was a more fitting episode to kick it off, and may have actually gotten better reviews. Or not. The public wasn't really prepared for Star Trek and reviewers seemed to focus on the trappings of the genre rather than the content of the stories. And back then, they would judge an entire series based on a single episode. So if they caught a stinker, the show was "bad." Cleveland Amory of TV Guide watched Shore Leave and thought it stank. And I do agree it's not the best episode to watch if one is trying to get a handle on the kind of series it was.
The Naked Time would not be an effective episode right out of the gate. I actually think it would be even more effective if aired much later in the season. After you log adozen or so missions with the crew, then you can really get into their personalities as they're revealed, which was one of the reasons The Naked Now didn't work for TNG (but there were tons more).
Charlie X, Mudd's Women, were both poor choices for a premiere. Corbomite wasn't done yet, so the real choice was between WNMHGB and Man Trap. Ah well.
Anyway, despite Justman and Solow's claims, WNMHGB was a more fitting episode to kick it off, and may have actually gotten better reviews. Or not. The public wasn't really prepared for Star Trek and reviewers seemed to focus on the trappings of the genre rather than the content of the stories. And back then, they would judge an entire series based on a single episode. So if they caught a stinker, the show was "bad." Cleveland Amory of TV Guide watched Shore Leave and thought it stank. And I do agree it's not the best episode to watch if one is trying to get a handle on the kind of series it was.
The Naked Time would not be an effective episode right out of the gate. I actually think it would be even more effective if aired much later in the season. After you log adozen or so missions with the crew, then you can really get into their personalities as they're revealed, which was one of the reasons The Naked Now didn't work for TNG (but there were tons more).
Charlie X, Mudd's Women, were both poor choices for a premiere. Corbomite wasn't done yet, so the real choice was between WNMHGB and Man Trap. Ah well.
Actually, I think The Corbomite Maneuver would have been the ideal ep to show first. Not only because this ep introduced the overall "mission" of the Enterprise, but it represents a good example of the "twist" ending, where they introduced an ugly, scary, moustache-twirling villain, who turns out in the end to be a friend.
I think this would have set the stage for what was to come much better.
I do agree, however, that showing WNMHGB later is also confusing because of the difference in the cast and the costumes.
So I think it should have been WNMHGB then Corbomite.
I think this would have set the stage for what was to come much better.
I do agree, however, that showing WNMHGB later is also confusing because of the difference in the cast and the costumes.
So I think it should have been WNMHGB then Corbomite.
Well, no, they were reviewing the sers as it was and how it was recieved in 1966. And... they were right. 3 years it was gone. It couldn't stand up by itself in the marketplace of the 60's. And sometimes individual episodes had a hard time standing up dramatically.
I love TOS, but it is inconsistant, and surprise surprise, even in the 60's some people had a hard time suspending disbelief.
Like it or not, reviewers review based on whatt they see. Man Trap has a big shaggy monster. And the line about playboy bunnies is right on. The minidresses were and are an embarrassment. Whose decision was that? It fits my understanding of GR and women, but they wear pants in both pilots, right? It sure undercuts its being taken seriously if anyone is skeptical of it to begin with. "Look -- monsters and space babes."
The minidress uniforms have been hashed, rehashed and re-rehashed ad nauseam. Sure, the unisex pants were practical and functional for day-to-day duty aboard a starship -- or in an office, for that matter. But this was 1966, and style won out over function. The hell with practicality -- we wanted to see women's legs!
I mean, would any female crewmember on a U.S. Navy ship today wear her hair in a style as ridiculous as Yeoman Rand's upside-down fruit basket?
I mean, would any female crewmember on a U.S. Navy ship today wear her hair in a style as ridiculous as Yeoman Rand's upside-down fruit basket?
Here's the opening two minutes of "WNMHGB:"
"Enterprise log, Captain James Kirk, commanding.
"We are leaving that vast cloud of stars and planets which we call our galaxy. Behind us, Earth, Mars, Venus, even our Sun are specks of dust. A question: what is out there in the black void beyond?
"Until now, our mission has been that of space law regulation, contact with Earth colonies, and investigation of alien life. But now, a new task: a probe--out into where no man has gone before.
"Stardate thirteen-twelve point four: the impossible has happened: from directly ahead we're picking up a recorded distress signal--the call letters of a vessel which has been missing for over two centuries. Did another Earth ship once probe out of the galaxy as we intend to do? What happened to it out there? Is this some warning they've left behind?"
I can see how the producers felt the opening of "WNMHGB" was "too expository in terms of the series concept and characters." Ultimately, of course, it was NBC that made the call about which episode to air first, not Trek producers.
It's hard to imagine from our vantage point 44 years later that Star Trek could have had an even more induring legacy if only a stronger opening episode had been aired instead of "The Man Trap."
And the above voiceover they cut when they made it into an episode, thus cutting the exposition.
Right. "Hey guys! I know: 'Where No Man Has Gone Before' would be the perfect opening episode--if only we could change it around a lot before it airs."
It's worth noting that with so much exposition, not only did they need to trim the opening voiceover when the pilot was made into an episode, they even felt compelled to cut out the "Space: the final frontier..." opening narration from the episode, too.
For what its worth, Star Trek won its time slot and came in first place when it aired "The Man Trap" on that first premiere night. But the following week when it aired "Charlie X," it came in second place in its time slot. The following week (when it aired "Where No Man Has Gone Before"), its ratings slipped a bit further from the previous week--although it still came in second place in its time slot.
If indeed "Where No Man Has Gone" before was the better, stronger episode, I don't know if I would have wanted to use it to come in even "first-i-er" in that premiere week. Maybe just keeping one's powder dry was sound strategy. It's hard to imagine that Star Trek would have had a Gunsmoke-like series run if only they had opened with "WNMHGB."
Last edited:
It's possible that at the time the schedule was made, WNMHGB hadn't been edited into the final form yet and still had the different theme music and Quinn Martin-style act breaks.
As for the female uniforms, blame Grace Lee Whitney and Nichelle Nichols. They got together with Bill Theiss and designed those despised miniskirts, because (surprise, surprise) they wanted to show off their legs.
And in the world of network television, three seasons ain't a half bad run, considering the vast majority of shows that make it to air don't make it past their first season. Nathan Lane's big dream in televsion is to film the fourteenth episode of whatever show he's starring in. As far as Star Trek is concerned, of all the shows that premeired on NBC in 1966, Star Trek is the only one that made it that long.
As for the female uniforms, blame Grace Lee Whitney and Nichelle Nichols. They got together with Bill Theiss and designed those despised miniskirts, because (surprise, surprise) they wanted to show off their legs.
And in the world of network television, three seasons ain't a half bad run, considering the vast majority of shows that make it to air don't make it past their first season. Nathan Lane's big dream in televsion is to film the fourteenth episode of whatever show he's starring in. As far as Star Trek is concerned, of all the shows that premeired on NBC in 1966, Star Trek is the only one that made it that long.
Despised?
The miniskirts were amazing. The man-pants that all the women wear (other than the catsuited ones) in other Trek shows are despised. They shoulda stuck with miniskirts in every show instead switching to awful man-pants.
Ok, but then don't complain because you get relegated to coffee-bearer or opener of hailing frequencies. Live as an object, die as an object.
"Your Honor, it was all her fault: the thing she was wearing and the way she was walking compelled me to objectify her against my wishes. It was all out of my control."
Similar threads
