• 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

That's true, although I believe he was paid residuals for the eleven episodes in which he received story and/or teleplay credit, in addition to residuals for his "created by" credit.

Not an expert on the ins and outs of whatever deals the WGA had in place in the 1960s, though. Anyone here have knowledge as to how episodic television residuals (if any) were set up back then?
 
...but isn't the income from sheet music sales pretty much zero when the music is for a television series nobody has seen (i.e. a failed pilot)?

Well, you never know. A failed pilot, maybe not. But a short-lived series? I seem to recall my father having a couple of musicians' "fake books" that included the themes to one or two relatively short-lived shows. Sometimes the popularity of a piece of music will have more to do with the music itself than the show it was attached to.
 
Since this week's post mostly re-uses Alexander Courage-related content that I've posted in this thread, I wanted to add something new for readers here. So, on the sidebar, I've included links to the finding aids for every Star Trek-related archival collection that I've been able to find so far. If there are some that I've missed, let me know.
 
Of course. Work has gotten in the way of my entry for this week -- on the origin of the star date system -- but I think I'll be able to keep up my schedule of one post per week.
 
^^^An interesting point. Maybe I'm missing something, but I've heard the story of how the set constructors mistook the word "runes" for "ruins," etc. Only thing is, unless my memory fails me, the word "runes" is not in Ellison's script, or at least the two versions that have been published. I looked for it.

Sir Rhosis
 
Here's another oddball from "Inside Star Trek" -- according to Memory Alpha:

Sally Kellerman had no problems with the silver contact lenses required for the role. (Inside Star Trek: The Real Story, p. 80) She did, however, have a problem with Dehner's uniform. Due to embarrassment over the fact that the tight costume was particularly close-fitting around her crotch area, Kellerman was given a "space clipboard" prop that she held close to her, covering up the problem, and was shot from the waist up, whenever possible.

Oddly, Kellerman never held a "space clipboard" in the episode, but it does appear that here trousers are ill-fitting, like some adjustments were made alleviate the issue.
 
^Heck, I'm just glad you did one that wasn't demolishing something from Inside Star Trek. I was starting to wonder if you were picking on that book. Good to see you're critiquing other sources as well. I actually didn't know a lot of this stuff about stardate origin claims.
 
Don't want to give the impression of picking on that book; it's one of my favorites.

Next week I'll be taking some claims from The Making of Star Trek to task, and the following week I have a piece about the "great phaser caper" from the Solow/Justman book.
 
Don't want to give the impression of picking on that book; it's one of my favorites.

Next week I'll be taking some claims from The Making of Star Trek to task, and the following week I have a piece about the "great phaser caper" from the Solow/Justman book.

For the record, I don't think you've been any harder on Inside Star Trek than any other source, but a lot of people hold it aloft a little too high despite its flaws.
 
Part of that scrutiny is that this isn't like the Meyer thing, which was represented as a memoir to cover memory lapses and errors; this is supposed to be the source, so it really needed to be bulletproof as well as entertaining, and deviations from accuracy call more aspects into question, regardless of good intentions.
 
My entry this week covers some of the changes between the typed manuscript of The Making of Star Trek and the published book, as well as a few of its inaccuracies.

This is something that I would really like to do in much further detail, but that's a project that I will have to put on hold, since my copy of the book is in storage in Los Angeles and I don't have remote access to the UCLA files. Luckily, I took some detailed notes for an article I published last year.

http://startrekfactcheck.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-first-draft-of-making-of-star-trek.html
 
Last edited:
For the record, I don't think you've been any harder on Inside Star Trek than any other source, but a lot of people hold it aloft a little too high despite its flaws.

Agreed--some treat IST as the "Holy Grail" of Trek books, but the opinions expressed in the book should not automatically earn 1st consideration over interviews and/or books from other involved parties--some with a unique, personal perspective.
 
My entry this week covers some of the changes between the typed manuscript of The Making of Star Trek and the published book, as well as a few of its inaccuracies.

This is something that I would really like to do in much further detail, but that's a project that I will have to put on hold, since my copy of the book is in storage in Los Angeles and I don't have remote access to the UCLA files. Luckily, I took some detailed notes for an article I published last year.

http://startrekfactcheck.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-first-draft-of-making-of-star-trek.html

Your best article yet! Thanks for all your hard work and research!
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top