Discussion in 'Star Trek - The Original & Animated Series' started by Warped9, Aug 1, 2015.
Or maybe he didn't need to steal anything.
Just ask Chill Wills and Burgess Meredith.
Ahh, a Rod Serling's Night Gallery reference! Good stuff!
Something about Night Gallery being in color that robs it of coolness. (to me) Weird, hey?
Some readers will know more about this, but there is something about the "hardness" of the film or the lighting employed by all Universal productions of that era that just seems cheap. Nothing beats the cinematography under the direction of George T. Clemens on Twilight Zone, though.
There was a glaring drop-off in artistic photography when Lost in Space went to color, pretty much an end to it. It's like the b&w cinematographers on The Twilight Zone and Lost in Space were carrying on the tradition of great films, while the color operators on LIS and countless other shows thought that color is its own reward, so they didn't need to be artistic.
We should be thankful the first season of Star Trek was shot with so much care. It didn't have to be.
But RSNG's color choices and the cinematography of Lionel Lindon, Gerald Perry Finnerman, et al., brought out a certain realism that looked like the early 70s which was not found on often overlit shows such as Jack Webb series, sitcoms shot on film (The Odd Couple, The Partridge Family, etc.) or flat detective dramas (e.g., Mannix). It made the horror/fantasy seem like it could happen in the real world you lived in.
Good point. “They’re Tearing Down Tim Reilly’s Bar” certainly captured that verisimilitude.
I really think my beef is with the film stock.
As recently as the 1970's my parents had the milk delivered. I'm not sure why as we had two refrigerators. It wasn't everyday, two or three times a week. There was a little metal box outside the house the milkman would put the milk in that anyone could have taken the milk from, but not once did that ever happen. Then convenience stores became popular, and milk stopped being delivered.
I wonder if there was ever any concern about what became of McCoy’s phaser, he was unconscious when Rodent disintegrated himself so as far as he knows he just dropped it someplace in 1930 NYC. Recall the concern about McCoy leaving his communicator behind on Sigma Iotia II in A Piece of The Action.
"Concern" is a relative term... Kirk just made a joke.
Back in TOS days, they didn't make much of a fuss about anything, except when all of a sudden (in Omega Glory) Kirk remembers that there is a prime directive.
Don't look too closely otherwise you might need to ask where in spacetime the Guardian of Forever kept the changing room.
Guardian of Forever: ALL IS AS IT WAS BEFORE!
McCoy: Wait a minute, I seem to have misplaced my phaser...
Guardian of Forever: I SAID YOU'RE GOOD!
Actually the GoF is the first instance of a predestination paradox. There was a vagrant disintegrated by a phaser in 1930.<--- that too had to happen as it did for the Federation to exist in Kirk's time; but that couldn't happen until McCoy shot himself full of cordrazine and went on his trip through the Guardian of Forever, followed soon after by Kirk and Spock.
Actually, in the alternate timeline, the vagrant died of food poisoning. It turns out the milk he's ingested contained a nasty strain of salmonella...
From the internet:
It might also have been the case that Rodent died in irrelevancy either way.
But the critical focal point is Edith, in particular when, where, and how she died. Would she have been on that street at that particular place and time were she not going with Kirk to the movies?
The thing is that she didn't need to die. The changes she caused that created that new timeline could have been canceled had she left with Kirk et al., just as Gillian did later but for some reason the GoF didn't give them the possibility.
I've heard that theory advanced before, but the story denies it as a possible option.
Not only was it necessary to stop Edith from delaying the American entry into WWII, but also there had to be evidence in the timeline that she had died. Now it is not specified in the story why that evidence had to exist, but it is implicit in the stipulation that it was necessary for her to die that evidence of her death must exist. One consequence of the evidence might be to stop someone else from being suspected in connection with her disappearance, say one of the other derelicts at her mission. If she had simply disappeared, suspicion might fall on somebody, which in turn might alter other events.
In any case, the condition of restoring the timeline was tied to her death. Once she died, Kirk, Spock, and McCoy were returned to the future. Their return was assured when the timeline was restored and denied otherwise. Ergo, the three of them could not be returned otherwise, so Edith could not live on in the future.
That was one of the elements that carried over directly from Harlan Ellison's original script, all the way to the aired episode. Edith had to die, there was no saving her.
Separate names with a comma.