TV shows that played against Star Trek TOS.

[Mr. Scott]

What was TOS' competition through 1966-1969?

When the show premiered on NBC in 1966, it was shown on Thursday evenings at 8:00 until 9:00.

ABC had something called The Tammy Grimes Show, 8:00-8:30. This show flopped after a month. (What replaced it?)

Unfortunately for Star Trek, Bewitched came on at TOS' last half hour and was #8 in the ratings.

CBS had My Three Sons at 8:00, a venerable series that was on until 1972. Then at 8:30 the CBS Thursday Night Movie, which was usually a Hollywood film that came out two or three years ago (this was years before home video.)

67-68 Season:

Trek was moved to Friday the second season, again at 8:00-9:00 time slot.

ABC had an hour long show called Hondo, which was cancelled by Christmas, at the same 8:00-9:00 slot.

CBS had Gomer Pyle USMC, which was one of the top series of the decade (believe it or not). Then the CBS Friday Movie.

68-69 Season:

NBC dumped Trek in the Friday Night Death Slot between 9-10 PM, CBS already shown one hour of a film, the film being led in by the number 2 show in the country (Gomer).

ABC had a series that lasted one month, and some other forgotten stuff. The next year, they would have the Brady Bunch on Friday night, a moderate hit that lasted 5 seasons.

CBS was a powerhouse network back in the 1960's, and I don't think there would be a place to put Trek up against them in any of their evenings. CBS did have the bulk of the best shows.

Where could of TOS have been scheduled in the 1966-1667 season? What would of Roddenberry wanted?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966–67_United_States_network_television_schedule

 

[Forbin]

What would of Roddenberry wanted?

"What would Roddenberry have wanted?"

Sorry. "Would of" drives me crazy.

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

Am I just being cynical, or is it possible that no matter what time-slot ST got the show would have been canceled? I agree that Friday nights from 9-10 is a terrible time-slot to have, but I can't help thinking that ST really was ahead of its time and, because it was a trail-blazer (there had never been anything quite like it before), was doomed to a short life-span until enough people had time to digest the concept while it was in reruns.

 

[HarryM]

Obviously it was a period of "fluff", musical variety shows and rather insipid sitcoms dominate with the odd cop show or western here and there, shows where the national psyche was focused, sci-fi it an odd-man-out in the lineup.

 

[MacLeod]

And just how many of those shows have survived in one form or another, and if the story is correct when demogaphics where brough in following ST cancellation, they actually revealed it was pulling in the key demographic despite it's time slot?

 

[Hambone]

Obviously it was a period of "fluff", musical variety shows and rather insipid sitcoms dominate with the odd cop show or western here and there, shows where the national psyche was focused, sci-fi it an odd-man-out in the lineup.

All true (I remember those days). But just a few weeks after Trek's cancellation, Apollo 11 landed on the moon and America went "space-happy". I wonder, if Trek had stayed on one more season, how the ratings might have been.

 

[Warped9]

Hmm... And yet while many of those '60s era shows are remembered in some measure none of them went on to have the impact TOS had.

Sadly I had no knowledge of TOS in the '60s. I didn't discover the show until 1970 when I was 11. During the '60s I remember watching Time Tunnel, Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea, Batman, Bewitched, I Dream Of Jeannie, Land Of The Giants, reruns of The Adventures Of Superman, animated Spider-Man, The Flintstones, The Munsters, Gilligan's Island, The Adams Family, The Rat Patrol, Daktari, Lost In Space, Johnny Quest, Space Ghost, The Man From U.N.C.L.E., Get Smart, The Saint, Mannix, The Beverly Hillbillies, Green Aches, Hogan's Heroes and probably lots of others I'm not recalling at the moment.

I forgot about most of it when I discovered Star Trek.

 

[Maurice]

I think Trek was pretty doomed all the way around. I mean, TNG did great in syndication, but outside of that, has any scifi show ever done big numbers on network TV?

What would of Roddenberry wanted?

That's would've as in would have, not would of, which means nothing.

 

[Warped9]

Actually my very earliest memory of Star Trek was in the late '60s after all. One evening my mother got up to switch channels on our b&w television (no remote in those days) and while she was changing channels she passed and stopped briefly at a show with some people in costumes within a control room and then the shot of an unusual spaceship crossing the screen. Of course, it was the bridge of the Enterprise and then a shot of the ship in orbit.

I had to have been between the ages of 7 and 10 but I can't recall exactly. We were living in Etobicoke, Ontario, but it wouldn't be until we moved to Mississauga, Ontario in the autumn of 1969 and then some months later in 1970 that I started watching Star Trek.

 

[Ssosmcin]

I think Trek was pretty doomed all the way around. I mean, TNG did great in syndication, but outside of that, has any scifo show ever done big numbers on network TV?

What would of Roddenberry wanted?

That's would've as in would have, not would of, which means nothing.

"What would have Roddenberry wanted" doesn't make sense either. I'm guessing that he meant to write "what would Roddenberry have wanted?"

Now back to our regularly schedule program.

 

[ToddPence]

ABC had something called The Tammy Grimes Show, 8:00-8:30. This show flopped after a month. (What replaced it?)

The Dating Game.

Later in the first season, Bewitched was moved to the 8:30 slot and the 9:00 slot was filled by That Girl.

 

[Forbin]

I think Trek was pretty doomed all the way around. I mean, TNG did great in syndication, but outside of that, has any scifo show ever done big numbers on network TV?

What would of Roddenberry wanted?

That's would've as in would have, not would of, which means nothing.

"What would have Roddenberry wanted" doesn't make sense either. I'm guessing that he meant to write "what would Roddenberry have wanted?"

Now back to our regularly schedule program.

See post #2, you unobservant grammarians.

 

[Maurice]

See post #2, you unobservant grammarians.

Oops.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

...I can't help thinking that ST really was ahead of its time and, because it was a trail-blazer (there had never been anything quite like it before)...

>Ahem<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Planet

Johnny Quest

That's Jonny Quest.

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

...I can't help thinking that ST really was ahead of its time and, because it was a trail-blazer (there had never been anything quite like it before)...

>Ahem<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbidden_Planet

In the context of this discussion I don't think you can compare the two. Movies do not have times-slots and although a given movie was required to perform at a certain level consistently and repeatedly for a given number of weeks (like a series), a movie's expected life-span was much more predictable (the same movie could not play on and on in theaters year after year...unless if we're talking about repertory cinema). Besides, Leslie Nielsen? Really? I know it inspired Roddenberry and all, but the two are not in the same league in my opinion.

 

[Warped9]

^^ And that's not my quote.

 

[plynch]

I think Trek was pretty doomed all the way around. I mean, TNG did great in syndication, but outside of that, has any scifo show ever done big numbers on network TV?


That's would've as in would have, not would of, which means nothing.

"What would have Roddenberry wanted" doesn't make sense either. I'm guessing that he meant to write "what would Roddenberry have wanted?"

Now back to our regularly schedule program.

See post #2, you unobservant grammarians.

I would have avoided correcting a fellow adult's grammar.

But perhaps on the rumored casting couch, one of GR's intended conquests/victims might have exclaimed, "What! Roddenberry have wood?"

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

^^ And that's not my quote.

Sorry, I can't seem to get the hang of these quotes. I'll try to fix it.

 

[Forbin]

"What would have Roddenberry wanted" doesn't make sense either. I'm guessing that he meant to write "what would Roddenberry have wanted?"

Now back to our regularly schedule program.

See post #2, you unobservant grammarians.

I would have avoided correcting a fellow adult's grammar.

Why? Anyone who's gotten to be an adult while using horrible grammar NEEDS to be corrected, lest they continue to look foolish the rest of their lives.

 

[T'Bonz]

Actually, they don't. If they've got to an age where it's still bad, odds are, they don't give a damn and those who insist on correcting someone usually aren't doing so out of benign motives, but because the person has irritated them in some stupid argument.