"In Epiosode Number Blank." Who says that?

[Brutal Strudel]

I've noticed that, in pop culture depictions of trekkies, the fan will often name an episode by first giving its production number, e.g.: "In Episode Number 2, 'Where No Man...'" Does anybody do this in the real world? I was watching an episode of Frazier when I noticed this, but it was also in the "Get a Life!" SNL sketch and in Futurama's "Where No Fan..." Every trekkie I know just uses the titles.

 

[Robert D. Robot]

I agree! I don't know where it started (the SNL skit?), but pop culture has taken and run with it. The names of the episodes mean something to me and my friends who watch Trek, not production numbers.

 

[Forbin]

That skit was in episode number 223 of SNL.

 

[A.V.I.A.F.]

For sure, I think it started with the SNL skit (which was hilarious btw) as a means of exaggerating the trekkie's attention to detail when it comes to all things Trek. Besides, even if one were to quote the episode number, would we quote according to air-date, star-date, or production date?

 

[Maurice]

No one I've met does that. Well, one friend's daughter refers to Scooby Doo episode numbers, but she's 5.

 

[Myko]

"More like episode 9, loser!"

 

[spooky spice]

<comic book guy>worst. episode. ever.

 

[Valin]

I believe that they did that In "Galaxy Quest" too; though its been a while since I saw it, so I could be wrong.

 

[plynch]

Production number, duh.

 

[Captain Robert April]

The problem is, would complaining about this make us look even more pathetic?

 

[jk82]

If you don't follow the production numbers, there are noticeable continuity problems. For example, just looking at The Enemy Within and Corbomite Maneuver, the relationship between Kirk and Rand is out of order and awkward. In Corbomite Maneuver he questions the wisdom of someone assigning a female yeoman to him as if he had just known her for the first time. It's not logical.

Spock's nerve pinch is established dramatically in The Enemy Within. In Naked Time, Kirk asks Spock to show him how to use it after Spock pinches Sulu (out of nowhere, he says: I'd like you to teach me that sometime.). This would have worked better if this episode had been shown after Enemy Within when the audience would be more familiar with the technique.

Some really bad episodes might also have been shelved for a while before finally being shown: Alternative Factor, Catspaw, etc come into mind.

 

[cblmc1296]

^^Great points. Kinda' makes me wonder what network execs are thinking sometimes. It seems like broadcast order versus production order would be much less critical in a sitcom or other type of show where continuity isn't as important. In a show like Trek though, it really would have made so much more sense to air them in the order they were made.

 

[Joker]

If you don't follow the production numbers, there are noticeable continuity problems.

o noes.

 

[Zaku]

In the SNL Skit they use "episode 25" for "This side of Paradise", "episode 51" for "Errand of Mercy" and "episode 37" for "The Enemy within".

I believe only "episode 25" is correct if you use production numbers. I've no idea about the others!!!

...am I pathetic enough...?

 

[plynch]

I do quote season number, just to flout my nerdiness. ya gotta be what ya are

 

[Forbin]

I'm proud to say that I usually can't remember what season a particular episode is in. Even if I CAN quote it word for word.

 

[scotpens]

. . . Kinda' makes me wonder what network execs are thinking sometimes. It seems like broadcast order versus production order would be much less critical in a sitcom or other type of show where continuity isn't as important. In a show like Trek though, it really would have made so much more sense to air them in the order they were made.

Yes, it would have made more sense -- but it wasn't always possible. Remember that "production" refers only to shooting the live action scenes. An episode of an effects-heavy show like Trek might not be completed until weeks after shooting, depending on the number and complexity of opticals required. In the first season, some episodes were being delivered to the network just a day or two before the scheduled airdate.

I do quote season number, just to flout my nerdiness. ya gotta be what ya are

Flaunt. FLAUNT your nerdiness.

That's okay, most people get it wrong the other way around.

 

[cblmc1296]

. . . Kinda' makes me wonder what network execs are thinking sometimes. It seems like broadcast order versus production order would be much less critical in a sitcom or other type of show where continuity isn't as important. In a show like Trek though, it really would have made so much more sense to air them in the order they were made.

Yes, it would have made more sense -- but it wasn't always possible. Remember that "production" refers only to shooting the live action scenes. An episode of an effects-heavy show like Trek might not completed until weeks after shooting, depending on the number and complexity of opticals required. In the first season, some episodes were being delivered to the network just a day or two before the scheduled airdate.

Yes, I know. Wishful thinking I suppose. In fact, I suspect the same may be true even now. But with TOS optical effects being done the "old fashioned way" (triple head printers and such) and being handled by third party effects houses, it certainly wouldn't always have been practical to air in production order - but it would have been nice.

 

[Mysterion]

I do quote season number, just to flout my nerdiness. ya gotta be what ya are

Flaunt. FLAUNT your nerdiness.

That's okay, most people get it wrong the other way around.

Oh, you're just flouting your vocabulary.

 

[plynch]

No, seriously, I flout it. I borrow my daughter's flute and play the theme Courage-ously, thus simultaneously flauting and flouting standard non-nerd decorum.