• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Fact-Checking Inside Star Trek: The Real Story

27102287086_d5081bf1be_o.jpg
 
The problem is that the assertions he's made will be accepted as "fact" for generations to come unless they're corrected. Like how some guy online speculated that maybe Isis in "Assignment: Earth" might possibly have been Victoria Vetri, admitting that it was just a guess that might be wrong, and then some idiot IMDb editor mistook that speculation for fact and put it in Vetri's IMDb filmography, and everyone else blindly copied IMDb's info without fact-checking, and now it's widely treated as fact that Vetri played Isis even though the woman is very clearly not Vetri.

So it's not about the person, it's about the information. Inaccurate information in a reference or documentary text will propagate forever unless it's challenged and corrected.

Definitely not Victoria as one, it looks nothing like her and two, I've asked her and she says it's not her!
JB
 
Definitely not Victoria as one, it looks nothing like her and two, I've asked her and she says it's not her!
JB

It would be nice if, for the documentary record, you could provide some more solid citation for that than just word of mouth. Like, if you could set up an interview between her and a reporter about it, or get a signed affidavit or video interview (though she probably has other things to worry about these days). The myth of Vetri playing Isis is so pervasive by this point that it would take clear, solid evidence to counter it.
 
Well it just doesn't look like her and that's why I asked her and she said she keeps being asked this and can't understand why because she was never in Star Trek!
JB
 
Well it just doesn't look like her and that's why I asked her and she said she keeps being asked this and can't understand why because she was never in Star Trek!
JB

I don't doubt your word, of course. It clearly isn't Vetri. But the mistake is so widely repeated and believed among the general public that it wouldn't be easy to counteract, so it would take some solid documentation, something that would stand up to journalistic or scholarly standards, like the sources Harvey consults for his posts.
 
I don't doubt your word, of course. It clearly isn't Vetri. But the mistake is so widely repeated and believed among the general public that it wouldn't be easy to counteract, so it would take some solid documentation, something that would stand up to journalistic or scholarly standards, like the sources Harvey consults for his posts.

Unfortunately, the sources at UCLA don't credit the actress for this part.

Common sense, however, leads me to conclude that it obviously isn't Vetri. Putting aside the physical differences between Vetri and the unidentified woman in question, Vetri had been appearing in featured guest roles on television since 1962. These came with screen credit and payment to match.

Extra work would have been a major step down.
 
^Yes, naturally. But the error is ubiquitously referenced despite all that. Even Keith DeCandido repeated it in his "Assignment: Earth" rewatch on Tor.com at first, and if he could fall prey to it, then that shows how pervasive the myth has become. So I'm hoping for some kind of "smoking gun" evidence that we could send to IMDb and Memory Alpha and Wikipedia and all the other sources perpetuating this mistake and tell them "Here, look, you're absolutely and indisputably wrong about this, here's the definitive proof, now fix it and pass it along!"
 
Yeah, the Vetri thing is a case study on how a bad piece of data can perpetuate itself to a maddening degree. All you need is one semi-reputable source like IMDB to fall victim to the error and then it becomes all but unkillable.

"But it says so on IMBD and Wikipedia . . . ."
 
Honestly, I'll never understand how that guy on that now-defunct website could've thought Isis looked like Vetri in the first place. Sure, there's a faint resemblance if you just see small photos of them, but for those of us who've seen Vetri in movies and shows, it's crystal-clear they're not the same woman. (Although I could certainly understand someone mistaking Vetri for Dawn Wells.)
 
Brace yourself, I have a new theory as to who played Isis: Barbara Babcock. If you look past the glossy black wig and exaggerated cat-woman makeup, the actress in "Assignment: Earth" bears a striking resemblance to Babcock: they've got the same nose, the same chin, the same striking blue eyes, the same arms and figure. And, hey, who provided the voice of Isis the Cat and Gary Seven's computer in that episode? Barbara Babcock.

To give credit where it's due, it's my girlfriend who spotted the resemblance. Karen is a professional sculptor who specializes in realistic portraits and likenesses, so she's an expert at examining faces and their structures. And, after comparing "Isis" to various photos of Babcock, she's convinced they're the same woman.

(By coincidence, a photo of Babcock turned up in an image search on "Victoria Vetri" and Karen zeroed in on it immediately. "Wait a second, who is she?")

Mystery solved?

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Not the same actress (unless she had surgery on her chin for "Assignment: Earth" and then had it reversed for "Platos Stepchildren). The "Assignment: Earth" actress has a cleft chin and Babcock does not.



 
BTW, I'm sure that the mystery of this woman's identity is one of the reasons* why Isis' human form remained unseen in John Byrne's recent New Visions issue with Gary Seven -- CBS/Paramount can't get consent to use her likeness if they don't know who she is or who her next of kin might be!

*The other reason, I'm sure, is that there's just too little photo reference of her to be useful in a Photoshop project. The human Isis barely moves, so there's not enough material to have her do very much.
 
Last edited:
A lot depends on the lighting and the camera angles. In a three-quarter view, you can see that Babcock's face is wider than it often appears in straight-on shots. And note that Isis's head is dipped slightly downward, which changes the perspective. And the apparent cleft in the chin could be make-up, lighting, etc. Karen deals with photographic reference on a daily basis and is used to compensating for shadows, different angles, changes in perspective, and so on. And she is utterly convinced that the facial structure is identical. "The distance between the eyes is the same. That smirk is the same. Those shoulders are the same."

Remember, we only really have one shot of Isis's face, heavily made-up and tilted slightly downward.

This theory would also explain why there is no documentation regarding who played Isis. Babcock's name would already be on the cast list, the payroll, etc. Heck, she'd already be listed as playing Isis (for the voice work). And it would also explain why nobody has ever come forward to say they played Isis, and why Babcock has never mentioned it. To the degree that she cares, she's already credited for various bit parts in "Assignment: Earth." And, if STAR TREK does come up, she's more likely to be asked about her larger roles in "Plato's Step-Children" and "A Taste of Armageddon."

It may well be that nobody has ever asked her if she did a thirty-second cameo as Isis's human form.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top