Takei is wrong on the facts. In other words, wrong. If his story evolved to be more and more dishonest simply to entertain, which is pure speculation on your part, that makes him dishonest and undependable. The experience of other actors is irrelevant to the fact that Takei is dishonest.
Nah. I mean, you are projecting just as much of your own bias into Takei's motives as I am, I suppose. Shatner's behaviour was well documented by multiple people. I love the guy but he was difficult and he'd even fallen out with Nimoy again by the time he died. It may be that the other actors blame him for decisions taken by other people for other reasons, or it may be that others took ownership in order to preserve the image of their star, or, most likely it was a combination of all factors to varying degrees.
Let the old guys live out their final years ranting if it makes them happy. Just don't take it so seriously.
I couldn't care less about Takei's motives. But he's just wrong.
You post your point of view repeatedly then tell me not to take it so seriously? Naw. Take your own advice.
Takei is documented in production memos as being a minor cast member and a weak actor. That, along with his decision to miss multiple episodes to film a movie, is why he has limited screen time. That is a fact.
Also, his complaints about Shatner don't hold up with what we see on screen. Takei talks frequently about how Shatner would huddle with directors and scenes would be changed to deny close-ups to the other actors and keep the focus on Kirk. All you have to do is watch a few episodes of TOS to know that's just garbage. First off, I cannot think of one single example of a scene involving Takei where he is the off-screen voice and the focus is on Shatner's reaction. Second, no TV director would let an actor stop him from getting all his coverage. That would be career suicide.
And the official line is that Grace Lee Whitney was let go because Kirk needed to play the field.
It's easy to overlook with all the focus on the Civil Rights movement that many people involved in the show fought in WWII, which was just over 20 years before.
I don't think it is possible to say that Takei is absolutely wrong even if we can say he isn't absolutely right.
Shatner was electric. Nimoy was alluring. McCoy's wore his heart on his sleeve. Of course Sulu couldn't compete with them, he was witty, but quite vanilla, but he complemented them. There was a definite intention for Uhura, Rand, and Sulu to have larger roles, as can be seen in the first half of season one. Kelly, Whitney, Doohan, and Takei were all guaranteed a minimum of 7 our of 13 appearances.
Sulu had some pretty meaty appearances in season one but not a focus episode and they did tail off. The exact reasons for reducing involvement overall are likely multifactorial and certainly not entirely down to Shatner's intervention but it is entirely possible that Shatner's behaviour was part of that culture shift.
Not every debate is is intended to be bad tempered. Not every discussion has to be polarised. There is no absolutely right or wrong answer. Takei is neither devil nor messiah, and neither is Shatner.
Although I have used the phrase, Shatner is a god, more than once to be fair.
I won't respond to most of your post because its rambling and mostly irrelevant to the topic of Takei.
However, you claim "There was a definite intention for Uhura, Rand, and Sulu to have larger roles, as can be seen in the first half of season one."
There is no evidence of that. None.
It was a new show and they were tinkering. They quickly settled on the format with the star Kirk, and his two co-stars. That's why those three were in the opening credits from season two on. They were the only cast members in the opening credits.
You declare that "it is entirely possible that Shatner's behaviour was part of that culture shift." What? That is pure speculation. It is vague and pointless. No further response needed.
Regarding your comment that "Takei is neither devil nor messiah, and neither is Shatner." That's a tad hyperbolic. The fact is Takei has been horrible to Shatner for decades.
He has blamed Shatner for his disappointing showing in Star Trek and his subsequent dismal acting career. But rather than point in the mirror to identify the reason for his career failure (like being a weak actor and missing 9 consecutive episodes of Star Trek season 2, causing the producers to give his lines to Koenig), he blames the series star.
But he doesn't stop at blaming Shatner for his own career failures. He ridiculed a 90 year old Shatner for his weight when he went into space. When he's not ridiculing Shatner about his weight he's harassing him about attendance at his wedding. He's entitled and obsessive and takes cheap personal shots. Repeatedly. He is awful.
Takei has spent decades generating bad will. The chickens came home to roost.
No, there wasn't. Star Trek was not an ensemble show and was never intended to be. Shatner and Nimoy were the stars, later joined by Kelly when his character worked so well with the two of them. Everyone else were supporting players, period. That doesn't mean that there wouldn't occasionally be a show that focused on them or in which they played a major role. But that wasn't going to be the norm. It wasn't until the convention circuit in the 1970's when the fan adulation led to a lot of revisionism about what Trek was.
I just dislike the level of vitriol directed at Takei when he is asked repeatedly for comment on the same subject. He's probably just trolling at this point so as not to be bored.
The first half of season one gives an indication that they intended to use the supporting cast more than they eventually did. That might have been down to just wanting to establish the characters. Uhura got a lot to do for a day player and they may have pushed her hard to establish her before any episodes aired before there could be any backlash. Conversely, Rand was dropped before anyone had seen her and wasn't brought back desite being pushed as the female lead and her subsequent popularity. At least part of that was Roddenberry plugging the sexual tension too much and too repeatedly.
There are some great ensemble pieces in there. Sulu had some great exchanges with Kirk in the Enemy Within, lots of humour. They could have done more with that.
There were a lot of headwinds, it was a new concept, and so I agree that they tinkered with the format. The reasons for the choices are multifactorial, cost being one major factor, but it's untrue that there is zero evidence that Shatner was one of the reasons. There is plenty of eyewitness testimony that has been documented. It was Nimoy who eventually used his star power to step up for the other actors. Shatner admits he put himself in a bubble and focused on what he could do to make his performance good and carry the show. He steamrollered the other characters without thinking about the actors because he felt the show's success was his responsibility. He wasn't malicious but his input can obviously be perceived negatively by those affected.
I am sure it is true that all the choices they made had many factors but multiple actors have stated that Shatner persuaded directors to put even more focus on him. There is evidence.
It wasn't an ensemble in the same way as more modern Trek became, and part of me likes that, but I think it ran out of steam and story ideas sooner than it would have if they had spotlighted other characters more. I find the episodes that focus solely on Kirk, Spock, and McCoy to be the least rewatchable.
It's obvious that other actors on set, watching Shatner, without direct access to backroom discussions might put more emphasis on his behaviour and so he is credited with more influence than he deserves. That said, others with more influence may have blamed Shatner fir their decisions as part of divide and conquer office politics. Roddenberry was always shifting blame and claiming he had fought for the actors.
Claiming Takei has had a dismal career is silly, however. He is still acting in his 80s out of choice. I saw him in Allegience in the UK. He has been nominated for multiple awards and has received 6. He wasn't an A-list star (probably D-list) and his range is more limited, especially compared to Shatner, but he's been successful, comparable say to Nimoy's non-Trek projects, despite racism and homophobia in the Hollywood machine. He's also quite outspoken on US politics, which may not earn him some friends.
Still, if you want to challenge the narrative, put forward a question in a thoughtful, non-judgmental way that he might find interesting and maybe you might gain more insight - ah OK February. Maybe not then.
It's on Amazon. I think I will watch it.
The first half of season one gives an indication that they intended to use the supporting cast more than they eventually did. That might have been down to just wanting to establish the characters. Uhura got a lot to do for a day player and they may have pushed her hard to establish her before any episodes aired before there could be any backlash. Conversely, Rand was dropped before anyone had seen her and wasn't brought back desite being pushed as the female lead and her subsequent popularity. At least part of that was Roddenberry plugging the sexual tension too much and too repeatedly.
There are some great ensemble pieces in there. Sulu had some great exchanges with Kirk in the Enemy Within, lots of humour. They could have done more with that.
There were a lot of headwinds, it was a new concept, and so I agree that they tinkered with the format. The reasons for the choices are multifactorial, cost being one major factor, but it's untrue that there is zero evidence that Shatner was one of the reasons. There is plenty of eyewitness testimony that has been documented. It was Nimoy who eventually used his star power to step up for the other actors. Shatner admits he put himself in a bubble and focused on what he could do to make his performance good and carry the show. He steamrollered the other characters without thinking about the actors because he felt the show's success was his responsibility. He wasn't malicious but his input can obviously be perceived negatively by those affected.
I am sure it is true that all the choices they made had many factors but multiple actors have stated that Shatner persuaded directors to put even more focus on him. There is evidence.
It wasn't an ensemble in the same way as more modern Trek became, and part of me likes that, but I think it ran out of steam and story ideas sooner than it would have if they had spotlighted other characters more. I find the episodes that focus solely on Kirk, Spock, and McCoy to be the least rewatchable.
It's obvious that other actors on set, watching Shatner, without direct access to backroom discussions might put more emphasis on his behaviour and so he is credited with more influence than he deserves. That said, others with more influence may have blamed Shatner fir their decisions as part of divide and conquer office politics. Roddenberry was always shifting blame and claiming he had fought for the actors.
Claiming Takei has had a dismal career is silly, however. He is still acting in his 80s out of choice. I saw him in Allegience in the UK. He has been nominated for multiple awards and has received 6. He wasn't an A-list star (probably D-list) and his range is more limited, especially compared to Shatner, but he's been successful, comparable say to Nimoy's non-Trek projects, despite racism and homophobia in the Hollywood machine. He's also quite outspoken on US politics, which may not earn him some friends.
Still, if you want to challenge the narrative, put forward a question in a thoughtful, non-judgmental way that he might find interesting and maybe you might gain more insight - ah OK February. Maybe not then.
It's on Amazon. I think I will watch it.
Last edited:
Maximus Ham.
And George Takei always oversells his devotion to STAR TREK as hey he took time off to play a supporting role in John Wayne's The Green Barets - which I'm not faulting him for per se as at the time it would be seen as a great career opportunity for him, although the film itself was not received well by the Public - but after doing that to say: "Yes, I was wholly devoted to STAR TREK..." everywhere he goes... and then he and Walter Koenig admit he was somehow pissed about lines and scenes that went to Chekov because Mr. Takei wasn't on the STAR TREK set because principal filming on The Green Barets ran long...
Just saying Mr. Takei always seems to do what he hates about Mr. Shatner - IE always promoting himself in the best possible light and nevr admit failings here and there.
For whatever it's worth, when it comes to TNG, I generally found the episodes focusing on less prominent characters to be less interesting.
Without getting into the debate, I think there are a few instances of one-liners, but hardly major moments.
Somebody said it earlier but there were initially only two main actors, Shatner and Nimoy, then Kelly was added in the second season credits because he became an unplanned major character. As for the rest of them, there is a reason their names are not in the opening credits; they were secondary background characters.
Yup, this exactly. Early on, Rand was conceived as being the third lead, but once that whole situation with Grace came to a head, it was down to Shatner and Nimoy. The show was never an ensemble piece. It was the leads and day players, and that’s it.
There would never have been the thought to put more of the cast on equal level, because that would’ve meant paying the cast even more money. By the time Paramount bought out Desilu, they were in cost-cutting mode, so it wouldn’t happen.
Like, I get it. We love these characters, but one can’t let fan adulation cloud the realities of the television industry of the 1960’s.
Yes, the pay is another indicator, they did not make much money at all, if memory serves me correct; like $500 or less per episode. To contrast, at the beginning, Shatner was at $5000 and Nimoy at $1500, I don't remember what Kelly or Doohan was but it was below Nimoys $1500.
Similar threads
