If Star Trek had been at 20th Century Fox

NBC went almost all color in the 1965-66 season, with the exception of “Convoy (because of black and white stock footage) and I Dream of Jeannie (due to the cost of expensive special effects)” (source). As such, there was never any danger Trek was going to be in B&W so long as it was on NBC.

Incidentally, the whole network went all color 53 years ago today, on my 3rd birthday!

 

Happy birthday!!!

 

As I remember, some other special effects scenes in "No Place to Hide" were also shot in color, such as the fight with the cyclops. Those scenes were used in the first five episodes. I have seen some of those color effects scenes somewhere on the internet, and noted that the scene where the chariot drives past the dead(/?) cyclops is much clearer and easier to see in color than in black and white.

 

Weren't the Bell jet pack sequences (when John Robinson searches for Penny) also filmed in color?

 

Yes indeed and it turned up in the color episodes as well.

 

You guys are right. If I recall, when the jetpack was used in a color episode, Guy Williams would wear his old costume and coat to match the stock footage.

Nichelle Nichols wore the same green hoop earrings for the first two years of Star Trek, just in case there would ever be the need to use an old shot of Uhura as stock footage.

 

The footage of Guy Williams shooting off into the skies in the final episode of Lost In Space (Junkyard in Space) was mainly taken from the earliest episodes of the series which were filmed in colour despite the main stuff being in monochrome! Williams also had a scene where he said goodbye to Penny (Angela Cartwright) dressed in the same clothes he wore in the first season to keep continuity!
JB

 

Is that based on anything or just speculation?

On Bonanza they definitely had the main characters mostly in the same clothes so they could use stock footage of them riding horses and doing other stunts.

 

The photographic evidence is not in dispute: she did wear the same green hoop earrings for two years running. If that wasn't done to ensure editorial matchup in a pinch, I'd want to know what the other possible reason was.

"Even in this corner of the galaxy, Captain, two plus two equals four."

 

So, inference, as I thought.

 

Yes. I don't like the word speculation, because it makes me sound like a mustache-twirling fabulist. Inference I can admit to.

In-universe, the earrings could be a symbol of Uhura's cult religion, from which she was defenestrated in Year 3 for missing too many orgies with the charismatic leader.

Or the green hoops were 23rd century Bluetooth devices, keeping her dialed in at all times.

Or maybe Gene Roddenberry ruled the earlobes with an iron fist, requiring any changes in jewelry to be personally approved by him. And he never got around to replying to Nichelle's pleas for variety. But that idea is crazy.

 

Or maybe Thiess just decided on that look for her.

 

Besides, Nichelle’s hair changed often, and they didn’t care if Billy Blackburn was in the long shots on the bridge in episodes featuring Walter Koenig in the chair, I can’t imagine the hoop earrings would be a factor in stock footage use. There were plenty of continuity errors on the series, especially in the bridge shots. Spock standing at his scanner, cut to him sitting and then back to standing... reaction shots from Dagger of the Mind in City on the Edge of Forever with Spock looking totally different and Shatner’s weight changes...McCoy’s going from short sleeves to long depending on the shot...and these are the small ones that just happened in the rush of production.

I’d go with it just being a colorful accessory they decided on.

 

Then why only the one style? There are editorial match-up issues you can easily plan to avoid, like those earrings, and then some other things come up that you can't avoid, like McCoy's tunic, when you don't have the actual shot you need in the editing room.

I agree that viewers never noticed the earrings, especially back in the CRT tube era. I just think sticking to the same pair for two years was cheap (free) insurance against the small risk of a tiny problem. It wasn't physically possible to keep Nichelle in the same wig for two years running, but the earrings was a little thing they could do.

 

That's it exactly – it was cheap. Earrings can last years and since she wasn’t in every episode or even that many scenes, all they had to do was make a pair and keep it in a box between appearances. As for the wigs, keeping them the same style would have been easy enough, but they changed – a lot – over the course of the series.


The actual “let’s keep this for stock footage” sort of shots seemed to involve major set adjustments, such as putting the viewscreen up front, and so on. But really, unlike Irwin Allen (who really tried to make his constant stock footage use blend seamlessly), they didn’t seem overly concerned with matching shots. They probably figured these clips would come and go with the first airing and possible rerun. Even though they probably expect the series to hit syndication, they didn’t count on the series being seen 50 years after the fact. 5 runs and then done, off to television obscurity. They were more concerned with simply meeting airdates.


How many times did we see a flopped shot of Shatner because they needed a reaction shot? Man, Charlie X is one of the sloppiest episodes of the early run: Uhura going from shooting an angry look at Charlie one second, and then crying a moment after he leaves because they grabbed a shot from the finale. Then Kirk’s uniform glitch, and my favorite “when I came aboard!”


Star Trek wasn’t that big on stock footage use of their actors other than inserts as needed. Matching Uhura’s hair would be more important than the hoops.

 

Just to put it on the record, I am not anti-logical inference or reasonable supposition. But I'm always concerned when those things are stated as fact, especially as regards something like shows with active and passionate followings like Star Trek or, because so much supposition and inference has become treated as fact, and if there's anything I've learned on the

Spoiler: project we're working on

Ha, made you look. We're not telling...yet.

, it's that things often turn out to be untrue when you dig deep enough. That's why I try to always flag anything for which I've got no evidence trail as "possibly" or "very possibly because" and not claim that which I cannot back up with sources.

That's just me. And @Harvey.

 

And more realistic!