Inside Star Trek: The Real Story

[Harvey]

I'm looking at pages 356-358 of the book, and although their was some trouble getting NBC to finally order the back half of the second season, I don't get a sense that the threat of cancellation was seriously looming at that point.

The way the book is structured, however, might mean that what you recall is simply in another chapter. I don't see "The Deadly Years" mentioned in the index, but that's not a surefire indicator of anything.

I wish I had more time to leaf through the book, but I'm a little busy this evening...

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

In a marvelous display of illogic, David Alexander cites that memo from GR to his staff concerning Forbidden Planet as "proving" that Roddenberry didn't lift Trek from FP. Alexander's reasoning - if it can be called that - seemed to be that the existence of a memo which appears to mention the movie as a kind of afterthought in one instance and in respect to a single aspect of production somehow demonstrates that it had no previous influence on Roddenberry.

Inside Star Trek is a great book and a nice work of gentle mythbusting that was long overdue. Not that the truth can be expected to catch up to the myth at this point - I saw a post earlier today essentially crediting Roddenberry for somehow having created the "Live long and prosper" greeting.

 

[Harvey]

Alexander's the author who wrote the authorized (i.e. white-washed) biography of Gene Roddenberry, right?

His reasoning definitely doesn't make much sense there. I mean, anyone who has seen Forbidden Planet and Star Trek could tell the film was an influence on the series. And that memo proves that it was a direct influence on Roddenberry at the time that he was writing "The Cage" and developing the series.

 

[Captain Robert April]

Hell, how many threads do we have popping up trying to purport FP being a part of TOS' prehistory?

 

[Harvey]

A healthy amount. It's a great movie. And an obvious antecedent to Star Trek. Nothing shameful about either of those things.

 

[jayrath]

Yes, but there were so many other Federations and Starfleets out there in the decade before. A lot conceivably went into the mix. Want to be thoroughly shocked? Watch an episode of the 1950s kiddie show, "Space Patrol."

 

[Gary7]

I've no doubt that Gene would have seen Forbidden Planet. As such, it must have had some influence on him. But as we've seen, such an influence was only subtle. Gene had been in the military and seeing how FP used naval terminology (even some of the crew call the captain "skipper"), it was only natural to apply the same idea for Star Trek. Beyond that, where's the similarity?

Funny thing about "Space Patrol." In one of Gene's earlier drafts for the intro, he described the Enterprise as being "on patrol"...

 

[Christopher]

Funny thing about "Space Patrol." In one of Gene's earlier drafts for the intro, he described the Enterprise as being "on patrol"...

Well, "patrol" is a very common word that would naturally be applied to the regular activity of a military vessel. Also, before Gene Roddenberry was a writer, he was a patrolman with the LAPD. So it's realllllllly reaching to assume he was referencing Space Patrol specifically.

 

[number6]

Funny thing about "Space Patrol." In one of Gene's earlier drafts for the intro, he described the Enterprise as being "on patrol"...

Well, "patrol" is a very common word that would naturally be applied to the regular activity of a military vessel. Also, before Gene Roddenberry was a writer, he was a patrolman with the LAPD. So it's realllllllly reaching to assume he was referencing Space Patrol specifically.

He also wanted Spock to be Martian.. Perhaps he was referencing My Favorite Martian.

 

[Harvey]

I've no doubt that Gene would have seen Forbidden Planet. As such, it must have had some influence on him. But as we've seen, such an influence was only subtle. Gene had been in the military and seeing how FP used naval terminology (even some of the crew call the captain "skipper"), it was only natural to apply the same idea for Star Trek. Beyond that, where's the similarity?

Both Forbidden Planet and "The Cage" are stories that are about the power of imagination (as well as the danger associated with such power). If you want more similarities, it's all over the place when it comes to the decor in Forbidden Planet.

Not that anyone, I don't think, is accusing Star Trek of being a rip-off of that movie; just heavily influenced from it. The only reason I posted the memo was because I had assumed that the film was an influence on Gene Roddenberry that he had probably seen in the past when the movie was in theatres (released in 1956, it predates the early development of the series by about eight years). As it turns out, Roddenberry screened the film at least once while he was writing the first pilot, and thought it worthwhile enough to request frame enlargements from it and to see if its key creative crew were available.

 

[Maurice]

^^^Yeah, like the Talosian corridors that have the "characteristic arch" shape in the Krell lab, for the most obvious rip-homage.

 

[Gary7]

Well, "patrol" is a very common word that would naturally be applied to the regular activity of a military vessel. Also, before Gene Roddenberry was a writer, he was a patrolman with the LAPD. So it's realllllllly reaching to assume he was referencing Space Patrol specifically.

Man, I was just saying it's funny, as in "coincidence"... not that it's a literal reference.

As for decor, I don't see much similarity between the two. Forbidden Planet was lavishly done, while Star Trek was rather spartan. Unless there's a few specific items you spotted in both? If anything, the "astrogator" device was completely ripped off by "Lost In Space" for the Jupiter 2, with the laser pistols looking rather similar.

 

[Christopher]

Man, I was just saying it's funny, as in "coincidence"... not that it's a literal reference.

On the Internet, it's hard to recognize a joke without a smiley. Not only because of the lack of nonverbal cues, but because there are so many genuinely ludicrous assumptions out there about one work being "ripped off" from another that the parodies are indistinguishable from the sincere misconceptions.

As for decor, I don't see much similarity between the two. Forbidden Planet was lavishly done, while Star Trek was rather spartan. Unless there's a few specific items you spotted in both? If anything, the "astrogator" device was completely ripped off by "Lost In Space" for the Jupiter 2, with the laser pistols looking rather similar.

Well, again, one of LiS's art directors was Robert Kinoshita, who was also an art director for Forbidden Planet. So it's not a "ripoff," it's a continuation of the same man's design sensibilities.

And at least the laser rifle used in LiS was, I believe, a reuse of the laser prop from Fantastic Voyage. A lot of the props and set pieces from that 20th Century Fox production were reused in Irwin Allen's shows and Batman, which were also Fox productions and had the same FX department.

As for lavish vs. spartan, that's a matter of budget. Look at "The Cage," which was as lavish a production as Desilu could possibly pull off, in order to prove that the studio was capable of producing a sophisticated SF series. I think there's a definite FP influence in the Talos IV panoramic backdrops, among other elements.

 

[jim hadar]

What a great book...some of my favorite parts involve Gene Coon.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I've no doubt that Gene would have seen Forbidden Planet. As such, it must have had some influence on him. But as we've seen, such an influence was only subtle.

There's nothing subtle about it - most of the set-up of TOS is a direct lift from the movie. Whether you call it "influence" or "ripping off" is a matter of semantics and interpretation.

It's interesting, too, that GR was working at MGM when he began to develop Trek and that he presented it first to that studio - he may have thought that they'd be receptive to it based on FP and also that the eventual series might make use of the vast collection of sf props, set pieces and costumes that MGM possessed (including all the FP stuff, which was already being recycled on Twilight Zone).

Ultimately, the visual aspects of Forbidden Planet were the least "influential" aspect of it probably owing to the talent and originality of the artists Roddenberry and Solow hired. Those aspects of it that came out of GR's typewriter - premise, characters, the plot of the pilot and so on - are the closest to the film.

 

[T'Grinch]

I need to pick up this book. Somehow I missed doing so when it came out.

 

[Gary7]

On the Internet, it's hard to recognize a joke without a smiley. Not only because of the lack of nonverbal cues, but because there are so many genuinely ludicrous assumptions out there about one work being "ripped off" from another that the parodies are indistinguishable from the sincere misconceptions.

Agreed... an Internet forum is not exactly an easy place to have a debate about something, especially when some people end up making copious quotes and responses (I've seen some people on TBBS spread down more than 50% of a given page!). But anyway, I think we're in sync.

Well, again, one of LiS's art directors was Robert Kinoshita, who was also an art director for Forbidden Planet. So it's not a "ripoff," it's a continuation of the same man's design sensibilities.

And at least the laser rifle used in LiS was, I believe, a reuse of the laser prop from Fantastic Voyage. A lot of the props and set pieces from that 20th Century Fox production were reused in Irwin Allen's shows and Batman, which were also Fox productions and had the same FX department.

"Ripoff" may be a little harsh... perhaps "borrowed" is more apt. Even though it's the same art director, it's a different production. But it is interesting how much was reused in Irwin Allen productions. With respect to Star Trek, we didn't see any physical usage of items from "FP". I must admit that the Talosian subterranean archways looked Krell inspired, although they were more pentagon shaped (in "FP" the Krell archways were much more squat, emphasizing triangular).

As for lavish vs. spartan, that's a matter of budget. Look at "The Cage," which was as lavish a production as Desilu could possibly pull off, in order to prove that the studio was capable of producing a sophisticated SF series. I think there's a definite FP influence in the Talos IV panoramic backdrops, among other elements.

Yes, "The Cage" was certainly one of the more expensive episodes (I can't remember if "City" eclipsed it). In saying "lavish", I was thinking more about the appearance of the ship interiors and of alien world sets. Actually, I found the matte panoramic backdrops more richly defined in "The Cage". In "FP", there's much more of a sparse desert like appearance, with the exception of Morbius's home. I got more of an "FP" feeling from LiS planets.

On a side note, I have to say that the Krell laboratory was extremely impressive. It definitely conveyed a very solid, other-worldly feel about it, and bold with all of those lighted power gauges circled about the walls.

 

[Gary7]

There's nothing subtle about it - most of the set-up of TOS is a direct lift from the movie. Whether you call it "influence" or "ripping off" is a matter of semantics and interpretation.

They both dealt with "the mind" as a very powerful thing, that is definitely something they had in common. But whereas "FP" had a human mind run amok with limitless power, the Talosians were not affecting anything physical--only projecting illusions in other people's minds. The Talosians weren't murderers; they just wanted some company. In "FP" there was certainly no illusion afoot... many of the crew were murdered by Morbius's subconscious. And in the end of "The Cage", the Enterprise leaves and the Talosians are left as they were with Vina. In "FP", we have a dramatic end to the Krell's planet.

So yes, from "FP" is the idea of a space military traveling about the stars. It's a very basic concept. I don't argue with "FP" influencing Gene, but I don't see it as the key inspiration and that much was
"directly lifted" from it. If you feel differently, please cite specific points.

I need to pick up this book. Somehow I missed doing so when it came out.

I couldn't agree more. It is not an easy read in some parts... but it is chocked with a lot of worthwhile details. It fills in a lot of gaps that were present before. It's so fascinating to hear about how touch-and-go things were, and yet how some things weren't quite the way Gene intimated. The back story really explains a number of behind-the-scenes issues that were previously difficult to appreciate. I'm convinced that you can't look at the series quite the same afterward... in a good way.

 

[Duncan MacLeod]

I need to pick up this book. Somehow I missed doing so when it came out.

Having read it several times I can say that it's well worth the effort of acquiring.

 

[Anji]

Just keep in mind this book was written after Roddenberry's death...and therefore Gene would have no way of responding to the allegations.

The fact that they waited till after his passing to write that book makes the content suspect and to be honest, was a little cowardly.