harsh realities of rewatching original Star Trek show

[ZapBrannigan]

And inexpensive in the set and wardrobe departments.

Sci-fi shows made nowadays have three big advantages that did not exist in Star Trek's day:

1) CGI and other computer-based tools have become amazing, fast, and affordable. There's just no comparison between modern scene extension versus having an old 2-D matte painting composited into a static shot. And that's just one example.

2) Even after adjusting for inflation, there is a lot more money in TV budgets today. This is because technology has increased the number of distribution channels through which a show can make money (home video, streaming...), and because international markets generate a lot more revenue than they ever used to.

3) Today's genre shows make fewer episodes per season. They must have more time for each one.

 

[Noname Given]

And inexpensive in the set and wardrobe departments.

Not for its day.

 

[IMC Headquarters]

Let's see... she takes one look at him and is instantly infatuated. On the ship he tells her how to wear her hair, and she goes along with it. She tries to be professional, and he kicks her out until she begs to be allowed to stay. Then she's literally crawling on the floor, telling him she'll do anything he says when he informs her that he wants her to help him take over the ship.

That was a bit disturbing to me when I saw this at the age of 12-13. As an adult who's been struggling for many years to deprogram from the patriarchal BS my grandfather inflicted ("you're not allowed an opinion of your own until you're 18"... then it was "not until you're married, and then your opinion will be whatever your husband's opinion is...") I decided right then and there that I was never going to give any man the chance to dictate my opinions.

And so now I look at how Marla behaved and am appalled.

Major cringe on today's viewing. Major cringe on yesterday's viewing. Marla is an embarrassment to Starfleet officers in general. Though, to her credit, she did intervene to save Kirk's life. And to Khan's credit, he didn't kill her for her betrayal. But still, I didn't need to see her crawling on the floor to convince me that Khan was one seriously charismatic and powerful man. All down to Ricardo Montalban's immaculate portrayal.

 

[Qonundrum]

Not for its day.

The 1964 pilot had cost over $650,000 - a sheer fortune back in the day. For a TV pilot. Made by not the largest of studios as well. And prior to "Batman" of all things as well, but I digress: Considering how TV was perceived at the time, especially science fiction - which generally looked cheaper, and how sets and props could not easily be re-used (case in point: "Lost in Space" quickly proves the problems in doing so.) Not to mention how the second pilot and what was greenlit had some considerable "facelifts", though the main set scaffolding seemed the same. That still isn't cheap. Especially when filming in color, when color film was a fortune as well - and people thought the 1966 Batman show was expensive (~$140k per two-parter when made by ABC, which is not including the cost of the big batcave set that had cost around ~$800k...) Now let's mention the shuttlecraft, which was needed for the show - but not yet built at the time one or two stories needed the thing, but thankfully they pretended it didn't exist and was also early on in the series and back when it was thought of that they'd never need a shuttle because they had the transporters as a budget saver, so they didn't need to waste screen time explaining why the craft didn't work (e.g. "The Enemy Within" and the somewhat gaping plot hole of "Why didn't anyone think of using the shuttlecraft?" the very second that episode was re-ran for the first time a few months later.)

 

[Warped9]

People have long proclaimed TOS had a shoe string budget. Thats not true. It had an average budget fir the time. The real issue is a series like TOS required an above average budget which they were never going to get.

 

[Noname Given]

The 1964 pilot had cost over $650,000 - a sheer fortune back in the day. For a TV pilot. Made by not the largest of studios as well. And prior to "Batman" of all things as well, but I digress: Considering how TV was perceived at the time, especially science fiction - which generally looked cheaper, and how sets and props could not easily be re-used (case in point: "Lost in Space" quickly proves the problems in doing so.) Not to mention how the second pilot and what was greenlit had some considerable "facelifts", though the main set scaffolding seemed the same. That still isn't cheap. Especially when filming in color, when color film was a fortune as well - and people thought the 1966 Batman show was expensive (~$140k per two-parter when made by ABC, which is not including the cost of the big batcave set that had cost around ~$800k...) Now let's mention the shuttlecraft, which was needed for the show - but not yet built at the time one or two stories needed the thing, but thankfully they pretended it didn't exist and was also early on in the series and back when it was thought of that they'd never need a shuttle because they had the transporters as a budget saver, so they didn't need to waste screen time explaining why the craft didn't work (e.g. "The Enemy Within" and the somewhat gaping plot hole of "Why didn't anyone think of using the shuttlecraft?" the very second that episode was re-ran for the first time a few months later.)

I've read the Pilot cost one million dollars. $650,000 was NBC's part of the cost, the other $350,000 was put up by Desilu.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Not for its day.

Using backlots and costumes from the wardrobe stores has to be less expensive than creating new sets and costumes. It was part of Roddeberry's pitch
The "Parallel Worlds" concept makes production practical by permitting action-adventure science fiction at a practical budget figure via the use of available "Earth" casting, sets, locations costuming and so on.

 

[suarezguy]

TOS was never intended as an ensemble show. It was always intended as a star vehicle for the main character: the Captain.

I find most criticism of TOS comes to ignorance of context—the critic is stuck in seeing things strictly from the limits of contemporary perspective.

I do much prefer the ensemble cast approach to always being about the one Star, even with a good character they tend to feel at least a little not fully worthy of getting all the attention.

 

[Warped9]

I do much prefer the ensemble cast approach to always being about the one Star, even with a good character they tend to feel at least a little not fully worthy of getting all the attention.

TOS was not alone in its approach. In that era it was very common to have a primary character with a supporting cast. And often one or two other break out characters would come to share much of the focus along with the main character. Thats about as ensemble as it got in those days.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

I do much prefer the ensemble cast approach to always being about the one Star, even with a good character they tend to feel at least a little not fully worthy of getting all the attention.

The Original Series supporting actors were quickly selected to be good enough for that purpose— to perform story functions without pulling focus. They were not star material. They were good in small doses, and available for small wages.

If you cut Kirk's part down to ensemble size, and gave him lines equal to Sulu and Chekov, etc., then you better find some terrific actors for Sulu and Chekov, etc. They would need talent, charisma, and screen presence.

You would NOT find them the way Takei, Keonig, and Nichols were cast, seeing only one person and saying, "Fine, go to wardrobe." (You got me: for Uhura, they read two performers, and cast the one who was in a sexual relationship with Gene Roddenberry. It's pure luck she was any good.)

 

[Ssosmcin]

Honestly, I think we're being unduly hard on the supporting cast. George and Nichelle were both fine actors in excellent in the roles. George wasn't given all that much to do, but Nichelle could be outstanding in her scenes. I'm hard-pressed to come up with an example of a poor performance from her in the original series.

Walter was fine when given the right material. And Grace was also excellent in her short time there.

Fans loved them for a reason and if they sucked, I doubt that would be the case.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

Fans loved them for a reason and if they sucked, I doubt that would be the case.

Okay, but you're setting a low bar. There is some distance between "they sucked" and "they could carry the show." Shatner could carry the show. Practically every guy watching wanted to be either him or Leonard Nimoy.

Myself, I never wanted to be Keonig. Making TOS a share-and-share-alike ensemble, with that cast, would have been a waste of the show's actual star power. That's my point.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Shatner had star power to spare and none of them, not even Nimoy, were "leading men." Nimoy didn't have the look or gravitas.

While I agree most of them couldn't carry the series, almost all of them had the chops to take larger roles.

 

[Pauln6]

Shatner had star power to spare and none of them, not even Nimoy, were "leading men." Nimoy didn't have the look or gravitas.

While I agree most of them couldn't carry the series, almost all of them had the chops to take larger roles.

Charlie X was written to showcase Yeoman Rand but if you watch it, she is just about elevated to be on par with Kirk. In her other meatier roles she was a couple of notches below that, and in half her appearances she was little more than a cameo. McCoy actually appears a lot less than you think until season 3 but he is such an engaging character that he is very memorable every time he's on screen.

In some ways it's frustrating that Shatner was so insecure. He was brilliant and would still have been great if he'd let the other actors carry a bit more of the weight. Personally, I prefer episodes that spread the story among more characters.

Poor Rand though. If they had carried her through the whole series, who knows if she might have been able to develop into more of an action heroine. Dagger of the Mind would have been another role like Charlie X except one where she had some agency, and the other yeoman went on landing party duty in all their season 1 appearances, even if they did nothing useful, more like her appearance in Miri. Still with Grace's comic timing, it may be that they would have been more lines or at least been more memorable.