The Wild Wild West and Ben Casey.
Gene Coon and Spock’s Brain
- Thread starter EnriqueH
- Start date
The Wild Wild West and Ben Casey.
BAM.
Space:1999 suddenly went from a mostly, consistently high quality SF drama, where it was a miracle to see something like that on TV, to a tacky, clumsy, lame brained thing.
====
With Trek, there was a brilliant, dedicated team in place to turn flawed scripts into silk purses. With Sp99, I believe he had much more creative control and input. They seem to have razed the show down to the ground and built it back up with new people, chosen by FF presumably. Result, a problematic but often amazing s3 of Trek, and a jaw droppingly lame Sp99, with few good moments.
====
With Trek, there was a brilliant, dedicated team in place to turn flawed scripts into silk purses. With Sp99, I believe he had much more creative control and input. They seem to have razed the show down to the ground and built it back up with new people, chosen by FF presumably. Result, a problematic but often amazing s3 of Trek, and a jaw droppingly lame Sp99, with few good moments.
Martin Landau laughs a lot in both series of Space 1999 and a few episodes end with his mush laughing or cracking a smile! Barry Morse and Nick Tate both have smiles and giggles especially Tate and even ice queen Barbara Bain smirks once in a while too like when Koenig comments on the plot of Full Circle!
JB
The thing with 1999 series 2 was that it went out of it's way to ignore the first series! Using medical logs to counter Treks Captain's logs and stardates they started the second series opener at 342 days since leaving earth which not only put the entire first series of episodes in one year it also invalidated Dragon's Domain which was set at 877 days since leaving earth orbit! Now FF is the only connection here between Trek and 1999 and nothing to do with Gene Coon or either Spock's Brain so I'll leave it there! 
JB
JB
The thing with 1999 series 2 was that it went out of it's way to ignore the first series! Using medical logs to counter Treks Captain's logs and stardates they started the second series opener at 342 days since leaving earth which not only put the entire first series of episodes in one year it also invalidated Dragon's Domain which was set at 877 days since leaving earth orbit! Now FF is the only connection here between Trek and 1999 and nothing to do with Gene Coon or either Spock's Brain so I'll leave it there!
JB
Year 2 had no respect for the timeline whatsoever. It not only overlaps with Year 1, it does crazy crap like this:
In "The Bringers of Wonder" Part 2, Helena's log says 2515 days since leaving Earth orbit. That's almost seven years. But later in the episode, John says "We've been in space for months." It's like the writer failed arithmetic. And Helena is like the proud mother who says her baby is 372 months. It's time to put it in years. It's like it was written with no thought.
Fair enough, I must've misremembered. I need to rewatch S1, then.Martin Landau laughs a lot in both series of Space 1999 and a few episodes end with his mush laughing or cracking a smile! Barry Morse and Nick Tate both have smiles and giggles especially Tate and even ice queen Barbara Bain smirks once in a while too like when Koenig comments on the plot of Full Circle!
JB
Other than “Breakaway” year one didn’t happen, according to year two. They apparently blew out of orbit, fell into a space warp and few months later, found Maya’s planet. They had some scrapes within that time frame where they needed to move underground and build some surface lasers, but other than that, all that abstract 2001 stuff was Koenig’s fever dream. 
I paid as much attention to the dates in Helena’s log as I did stardates. Meaning “not so much.” Not for anything, but year one was all over the place with time, too. Johnnybear points out that “Dragon’s Domain” was 877 days after the pilot. Yet “Death’s Other Dominion” (shot much earlier) has them state they somehow wound up in the year 2870, speculating (but not showing) that they must have entered a time warp down the line. This was forgotten as soon as it was said.
Considering how they went through a “Black Sun” (“right across the universe!”) and had all sorts of time manipulation in “Another Time, Another Place” they shouldn’t have any idea what year it is on Earth anymore.
I hear a lot of sass about year two, but year one didn’t put any more thought into those details than Freiberger did. The only real difference is in style of storytelling. Space:1999 always had wonky science and physics and timelines. Gerry Anderson didn’t care: “it’s entertainment not a documentary” to paraphrase his response to Asimov’s criticism of the show.
Year two won’t appeal if you hate monsters, action adventure, jazz/rock soundtracks and over the top emoting when you were used to slow metaphysical stories with subdued action and a classical music styled soundtrack. But honestly, neither year was sterling science fiction. They were weekly adventures. Year one was just more mature in tone and a bit more real in execution. Character development was non-existent and, worse, inconsistent. And this is from a fan who considers the entire series my 3rd favorite show of all time. As I said, I enjoy both years equally just in different ways.
I paid as much attention to the dates in Helena’s log as I did stardates. Meaning “not so much.” Not for anything, but year one was all over the place with time, too. Johnnybear points out that “Dragon’s Domain” was 877 days after the pilot. Yet “Death’s Other Dominion” (shot much earlier) has them state they somehow wound up in the year 2870, speculating (but not showing) that they must have entered a time warp down the line. This was forgotten as soon as it was said.
Considering how they went through a “Black Sun” (“right across the universe!”) and had all sorts of time manipulation in “Another Time, Another Place” they shouldn’t have any idea what year it is on Earth anymore.
I hear a lot of sass about year two, but year one didn’t put any more thought into those details than Freiberger did. The only real difference is in style of storytelling. Space:1999 always had wonky science and physics and timelines. Gerry Anderson didn’t care: “it’s entertainment not a documentary” to paraphrase his response to Asimov’s criticism of the show.
Year two won’t appeal if you hate monsters, action adventure, jazz/rock soundtracks and over the top emoting when you were used to slow metaphysical stories with subdued action and a classical music styled soundtrack. But honestly, neither year was sterling science fiction. They were weekly adventures. Year one was just more mature in tone and a bit more real in execution. Character development was non-existent and, worse, inconsistent. And this is from a fan who considers the entire series my 3rd favorite show of all time. As I said, I enjoy both years equally just in different ways.
It's more jarring because Bringers part one states it is 1912 days since Breakaway but part two says it is 2515! Well that is a clear error unless the Bringers were on Alpha for nearly two years anyway?
The Death's Other Dominion mistake isn't really one as the moon went through a space/time warp in Another Time, Another Place and that was episode six in production order where as DOD was fourteenth I believe! The Black Sun also took them to the other side of the universe as well in the third produced episode! It depends on which order you watch them plus who's to stay that Tanner's ship didn't hit the same time warp as the moon but earlier and found itself hurled back in time some nine hundred years but their computer counted time as on from their initial launching? It all goes with the idea that ITVs original viewing order wasn't very good and the production order makes much more sense just like with Star Trek!
JB
Last edited:
I'm suspicious of that. It seems like the kind of false quote that David Gerrold might have invented to punish Freiberger for refusing to do a "Tribbles" sequel, which was the primary basis for Gerrold's jihad against him. Everyone who takes that quote to be Freiberger is instantly turned against the guy.
Gerrold was the one publishing non-fiction Trek books and writing a Starlog column. Pre-Internet, Freiberger had almost no way to answer back. That gave Gerrold a great temptation to abuse his control of the narrative. My opinion.
Edit: this theory proved incorrect.
Last edited:
Ummh... season one of 1999, I vaguely divide into 8 superb, 8 watchable, 8 awful. The numbers aren't quite right, but there was a lot of trash in season one.
Unfortunately, the best of season two are, once you're older than 10, only watchable.
The days since narration... well, the 700 day gap between the two episodes of Bringers of Wonders makes the other contradictions of season one a " canon to be ignored" matter.
Last edited:
@ZapBrannigan
Freiberger said, "Oh, I get it. Tits in space," according to an interview Margaret Armen gave to Ed Gross. Armen recalled that Freiberger made the declaration after viewing an unidentified episodes with her in the studio projection room.
Freiberger said, "Oh, I get it. Tits in space," according to an interview Margaret Armen gave to Ed Gross. Armen recalled that Freiberger made the declaration after viewing an unidentified episodes with her in the studio projection room.
If they used some gold key storyline it may of improved third season.I liked of seen the last episode with Milton Berle in it this episode checkov doest have beatles hair cut.duly
Uhura etc would have more to do.
Since your mentioning 99 I always liked Bergman the best.
Uhura etc would have more to do.
Since your mentioning 99 I always liked Bergman the best.
Interesting thing is that in 1999, Freiberger wanted rid of Bergman, reckoning the professor should be an odd genius kid.
What has to be remembered is that there wouldn't have been a second season of 1999 without him. Given that there wasn't a third season, it might be better if there was only one season, but if the reboot had worked there might have been many seasons of the new version, and the half remembered season one that eventually turned up on dvd, shockingly different.
I don't have issues with the idea of Spock's brain. It was just the implementation. Spock being such as smart alec. I think every bit not involving Nimoy was OK. Just eliminate his speaking and zombie parts. Just show him on the bridge at the beginning of the episode, in sickbay without a brain and in sickbay again with his brain.I'm sure they could have filled the time somehow with maybe some explanations of how they weren't violating the prime directive.
OK maybe have toned down the 'lovely' aspect of the 'women' as well
The episode did have some good things, the discussion on the bridge, Scotty, Kirk's determination to save his friend against the odds. Seems stupid but I was right behind Kirk until I suppose zombie Spock arrived.
Space 1999. I'm not a spaceship girl but I did like the spacecraft, moonbase on Space 1999. What I didn't like was the science. Yeh yeh forget it. But if your moon was travelling fast enough to move from one star system to another in a week it wouldn't have a couple of days to investigate the system maybe a few seconds. Season 2 was a whole different kettle of fish to Season 1. Like a totally different show. I liked aspects of both. Maybe a combination of both would have been better.
OK maybe have toned down the 'lovely' aspect of the 'women' as well
The episode did have some good things, the discussion on the bridge, Scotty, Kirk's determination to save his friend against the odds. Seems stupid but I was right behind Kirk until I suppose zombie Spock arrived.
Space 1999. I'm not a spaceship girl but I did like the spacecraft, moonbase on Space 1999. What I didn't like was the science. Yeh yeh forget it. But if your moon was travelling fast enough to move from one star system to another in a week it wouldn't have a couple of days to investigate the system maybe a few seconds. Season 2 was a whole different kettle of fish to Season 1. Like a totally different show. I liked aspects of both. Maybe a combination of both would have been better.
Last edited:
Thanks, I just found that issue of Starlog magazine (#125, Dec '87) and read it. The quote is more plausible in her telling than I made it out to be.
They must have been screening The Menagerie. Or The Man Trap. Or Mudd's Women. Or What are Little Girls Made Of. Or Dagger of the Mind. Or Shore Leave. Or Who Mourns for Adonais. Or Mirror, Mirror. Or Wolf in the Fold. One of those episodes that made a big point of a "hot woman" scene or featured a dancing girl. If he walked into the screening room and that kind of scene was his first glimpse of Star Trek, I can see him saying that.
And later he put a dancing girl in "Whom Gods Destroy." He did the right thing.
Does anyone know if they approached Gene Roddenberry to produce Space 1999?
I don't mean to do more of a disservice to Fred Freiberger but if you were looking to recruit someone associated with Star Trek then the obvious choice seems to be the guy whose name is all over the series. And Roddenberry would, I think be available in 1976 because it falls in the gap between his unsuccessful pilots and the start of Phase II.
Similar threads
