All right, all right, already!No, I never saw that version. So I guess if it was broadcast somewhere, that makes it canon! Which is fine with me, actually. -- RR
Not only was it broadcast "somewhere", it's also out on DVD ...
Did Mc'Coy or Scotty ever have any brothers or sisters ?
- Thread starter TransporterBeam
- Start date
Not only was it broadcast "somewhere", it's also out on DVD ...
Well, there's no on-screen mention of any other sons of Sarek whose weddings young Picard might have attended, and Roddenberry said at the time that Picard was meant to be referring to Spock's wedding, so that's good enough for me!
I hope they mention more about the families of the crew in the new movie.
Last edited:
Yeah, but at the time Roddenberry was suffering from an advanced case of Bendii syndrome and was only being barely held together by the telepathic aid of Richard Arnold.
Well, there's no on-screen mention of any other sons of Sarek whose weddings young Picard might have attended, and Roddenberry said at the time that Picard was meant to be referring to Spock's wedding, so that's good enough for me!
Anyway, referring just to the marriage of ``his son'' was a wise bit of obscuration: it gives them the points for the Spock mention without in any way impairing future stories in case someone happens to think of any.
IIRC, that was the name Alan Dean Foster used in his extra scenes featuring Uhura as a young woman in one of the "Star Trek Log" TAS adaptations.
He also gave names to the parents of M'Ress in a different "ST Log".
Actually, he said something like, "Yes, that just might be referring to Spock." They deliberately left it canonically vague.
What struck me about TOS characters is that their "family" was the crew. They would have been the 80s corporatists' dream of someone whose job is their life. TNG had Dr. Crusher and her son Wesley. DS9 had Capt Sisko and his son Jake along with the O'Briens. Voyager ended up with B'Lanna and Tom married with a child. TOS had none of that or it was not relevant. This made for a more focused storyline.
Am I a thread killer or what?
Okay, it might be a little irreverent, but that was damn funny. And true. And sad that it was true....
Ah, right. I stand corrected. I knew Roddenberry had said something about it (maybe) being Spock, but I hadn't remembered exactly what.
Cadet and Engineer's Mate Peter Preston(Ike Eisenmann)in STAR TREK II was supposed to be the son of Scotty's sister. That's why he was supposed to be his nephew in the deleted scenes and trimmed dialogue...his sister was supposed to have had Peter.
As mentioned in this post, this post, and this post, and indeed referenced in much of page 1 of this thread.
As mentioned in this post, this post, and this post, and indeed referenced in much of page 1 of this thread.
Oh, eat me. I came in late and didn't want to read every single post.
You don't get all the posts cooleddie74 has by stopping to read.
Hey, I read MOST. I've also been a member for more than seven years. That's most of the existence of the BBS.
Getting back to the original thread. Effective TV series have equal effective and opposite type series. There is the type with lots of back story and story arcs(think daytime soaps, but NuBSG, Grey's Anatomy, and DS9). Then there is the stand alone plot and minimal arc(think House or TOS).
Star Trek, overall, seems more effective with minimal arc. With that format you didn't have to think about Capt. Kirk's Aunt Agatha or whether he and yeoman Rand were socializing after hours. This stands in the way of saving the galaxy.
Star Trek, overall, seems more effective with minimal arc. With that format you didn't have to think about Capt. Kirk's Aunt Agatha or whether he and yeoman Rand were socializing after hours. This stands in the way of saving the galaxy.
Last edited:
We know nothing about the fate of Kirk's nephews aside from Peter, since they weren't mentioned at all in "Operation: Annihilate." Had they died, Kirk might have mentioned something to that effect. On the other hand, had they lived, Kirk might have mentioned something to that effect.
I suspect that the writers forgot the other two nephews.
Lets hope that if the new movie shows us any family Scotty or McCoy has - or any other charcater has, that they just won't kill them off. We give Kirk a son just to kill him off. We give Kirk a brother just to kill him off. We give Scotty a nephew just to kill him off. We give Spock a half-brother just to kill him off. We meet McCoys father on his deathbed. I don't understand this fascination with death of relatives.
Similar threads
- Locked
