The Menagerie - now 45 years old (delayed)

[Wingsley]

Better late than never...

This past week marked the 45th Anniversary of the only two-part episode of the original "Star Trek" televison series. The episode was called "The Menagerie", and it aired 17 and 24 Nov. 1966. "The Menagerie" won the 1967 Hugo Award for "Best Dramatic Presentation".

 

[number6]

Don't we all feel a little older now?

 

[Wingsley]

Yeah, I must be getting senile. I didn't get around to posting this till today.

That is a milestone for me. If you look at this two-parter, it really was the first STAR TREK movie, albeit a made-for-TV movie. It is simply amazing to me that the original 1964 pilot was so well put together, in terms of sets, presentation, characters, FX, and everything else. It really was like the kind of accomplishment FORBIDDEN PLANET made on the Big Screen only 7 or 8 years earlier. Roddenberry and company did it from scratch.

And for the TOS production crew to take that footage and realize an episode-around-an-episode is quite a feat in itself. Talk about making lemons (an unaired, un-utilized pilot) into lemonade!

 

[Harvey]

One of these days I'm going to read John D.F. Black's original story outline for the "envelope" (which he entitled "From the First Day to the Last"). He went to the WGA and arbitration to receive a screen credit for the episode, but was ultimately denied. I'm curious how similar (or different) his version is to the final episode.

 

[number6]

I don't think it's going to be all that similar. The whole tone of the envelope seemed to be quintessential Roddenberry.

 

[Wingsley]

Yes, that's another thing that makes "The Menagerie" stand out. If you look at all the eps of TREK, none exhibit Roddenberry's expressions (good and bad) than this one, envelope or no envelope.

 

[number6]

I dunno.. He really shined on The Omega Glory..

 

[Harvey]

I don't think it's going to be all that similar. The whole tone of the envelope seemed to be quintessential Roddenberry.

True, although Black thought it was similar enough to sue for credit (and, of course, the money that follows credit).

 

[number6]

Granted.. He didn't work on the series much longer after that episode, but also follows in what would become an increasing line of writers who felt betrayed by GR for being re-written. We'll never know the truth.

 

[Harvey]

He quit after his initial contract for 13 episodes was up, not only upset at Roddenberry for re-writing "The Naked Time," but also for re-writing the work of others as well, according to Inside Star Trek: The Real Story.

Although, since Black's original outline is held at UCLA, I'll be able to come to some conclusion over the merits of his suit...when I find the time to get there.

 

[MikeH92467]

Roddenberry made a fair case for himself in "The Making of Star Trek" when it came to the re-write issue. He addressed it by admitting that it cost him the friendship of some extremely accomplished writers, but his reasoning was that the stories had to be re-written to fit the series "bible", meet logistical constraints and follow established precedents. That was his side of the story in an authorized history of the show, so you have to take that into consideration, but it's always struck me as a reasonable explanation of how and why stories get re-written. It also serves as a caution for anyone who wants to write scripts.

 

[Wingsley]

STAR TREK, like many of the better sci fi TV shows, has a very touchy format. Writers who draft scripts for the show have to "speak with the series' voice" or they will set themselves up for disappointments. This must've been especially tough when TOS first came out in the late '60's, since they had no iconoclastic framework to go by. Can you imagine how tough it was to write for the show after seeing only a small number of episodes?

It wouldn't be like writing for MY THREE SONS, where all the characters and stories are situated in 1960's U.S.A. A writer would be wading eyeball-deep into completely unknown waters, and whatever the top executive producers okay'd would be deemed acceptable "true STAR TREK".

 

[Agonizer]

Roddenberry made a fair case for himself in "The Making of Star Trek" when it came to the re-write issue. He addressed it by admitting that it cost him the friendship of some extremely accomplished writers, but his reasoning was that the stories had to be re-written to fit the series "bible", meet logistical constraints and follow established precedents. That was his side of the story in an authorized history of the show, so you have to take that into consideration, but it's always struck me as a reasonable explanation of how and why stories get re-written. It also serves as a caution for anyone who wants to write scripts.

It's one thing to rewrite an episode to get it to fit into the flow of the show, but another to not give the original writer credit. Contrast that with later Star Trek where the producers like Piller, Moore, Behr, etc would sometimes rewrite episodes almost completely but the official credit would still go the original writer.