Irwin Allen's (LIS) Thoughts On Star Trek?

I find this - very - hard to swallow. Lost in Space was not a half hour series. It wasn't also one of Irwin Allen's "stock footage" shows. They still had 60-75 pages of script to film every week. Camera set-ups had to be made, actors had to be placed, lighting had to be designed, practical effects, like explosions had to be done, and so on. The series also had a number of episodes where "doubles" of the characters were involved, so split screen had to be done. LiS wasn't really that cheap a series. It just didn't have a lot of SFX and, after a time, large numbers of guest stars. In the 3rd season, the series became more elaborate after a half season of being bargain basement, so really, three day shoots seem like a fantasy to me. Someone was telling tall tales or misremembering.

However, if someone said, "some episodes in the second and third seasons of Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea were shot in three days," I'd totally get behind it. That is where Irwin counted his pennies. a half dozen episodes were made up of primarily stock footage with obvious on-set flubs left in. Lost In Space became less costly in the mid second season, and it showed, and MAYBE a small handful were shot that quickly, but for the most part, I'd say 5 days at the quickest.

This is not on you, it's on Jonathan Harris or whoever said it.

I think people are unduly hard on Irwin Allen. He liked to stretch the dollar, but he also had budgets to meet. He had three series going on simultaneously and these were not stodgy courtroom dramas. He had three complex sci-fi series to run and, from what I understand, would rob Peter to pay Paul in order to meet those declining budgets and stay on the air. He chased trends to feed the ratings and gave the audiences what they asked for. If you look at his series, you can see how much money went into them, but over time they were scaled back. When he had the the money, he spent it. He was all about spectacle. Not sophistication or complexity or characters; he was about scope, danger and action. ABC was the third place network at the time, where all but LiS aired. They weren't gonna be pumping money into his shows if they weren't bringing home the bacon, so to speak. CBS wanted light entertainment and in LiS, that's what they got. Again, on declining budgets. What Star Trek had over all of those shows were creatives who wanted to say more than "stop that monster" or "catch that spy." It's all in the writing. Fox had greater resources, so Irwin's shows tended to look like movies. Star Trek didn't have that advantage. Desilu was a small outfit.

I dunno, man, the worst of Lost in Space is intolerable. Like root canal without Novocaine. The worst of Star Trek still tends to have something to entertain. Shatner, the energy, a weird scene, good atmosphere, something. The worst of Star Trek is "And the Children Shall Lead." The worst of LiS is "Space Vikings" or "Mutiny in Space." After 45 years, I still haven't watched either episode from beginning to end.

 

Don't forget the LIS episode The Great Vegetable Rebellion with Stanley Adams as a giant carrot.

 

That is the "Spock's Brain" of lost in space. It's bad, but there are plenty of worse.

 

It's been a while since I've seen The Great Vegetable Rebellion, but doesn't Dr. Smith turn into a Green Lettuce Man?

 

Close! A stalk of celery. What makes this episode a little more tolerable than some other episodes is that it's never actually boring, it involves the whole cast to a great degree and it's actually funny. That places it ahead of a number of 2nd season episodes.

 

Both series had laughable moments

 

I thought I read somewhere that Guy Williams and June Lockhart weren't in that episode because they laughed at the script and Irwin Allen had them written out.

 

There are some Trek episodes like "The Lights of Zetar", "The Mark of Gideon", "The Cloudminders"...even in the 2nd season "The Apple" and even "Who Mourns for Adonis" that are so beyond ridiculous...that they lose points with me because they aren't camp like LIS was. At least when Chavo was on LIS in the 3rd season...or some of the worst of LIS...it was all campy good fun..not played like serious drama.

I think Harve Bennett said it best...When he rewatched all 79 original episodes to better understand the series....He said "30 of them were brilliant, 30 were ok and the rest were just bad...and you know that's a pretty good percentage"....so I love "Star Trek" ..I still think its in the top 5 or 10 TV shows of All time...but some of the bad episodes have close to worthless from my point of view.

 

I think they were written out of the next episode that was filmed, not necessarily in the order aired.

 

Yes, just about any television series I watch has those percentages. Some episodes are excellent, others are so-so and the rest are stinkers. The Twillight Zone also comes to mind when I categorize episodes using great/good/poor parameters.

 

...You must be watching just the Best of da' Best....I envy your taste in TV shows.

 

True story. They behaved so badly, they were written out of the next two episodes.

 

Well, this is when it boils down to taste. I think "Adonias" is a fantastic episode, full of great ideas and fabulous performances (and incredible music). "Zetar" is a wonderfully chilling tale of possession with a number of very eerie and even terrifying moments. I prefer my SF played straight, even when it's ridiculous. Not even putting Trek in that mix, to compare Irwin Allen shows, I always preferred Voyage to LiS specifically because Voyage was always played straight, even when it was ridiculous. LiS went to full comedy and was unbearable to me. Even at its worst I - always - find something to enjoy in an episode of classic Trek. Always. It's never wasted time. I can't say that about LiS - and I consider myself a fan.

As Spock's Barber stated, pretty much every TV series can be seen the same way. Name one show, particularly a SF TV series, which has brilliantly compelling episodes week after week for seasons on end. Money, network standards, and schedules all played a part in how a series turned out. Star Trek is my all time favorite series, and maybe one or two episodes I never have to watch again, but for the most part, the standards of the series were very high. If they failed, it was never for lack of effort. When I look at my library of SF TV series, I see a bunch of shows I love, some legends, others guilty pleasures, and all of them have excellent to embarrassing episodes. Again, it's all a matter of taste.

 

I'm glad you liked "Adonis" and "The LIghts of Zetar", but to my point, you never see these episodes listed in fans top 10's or in any Trek reference books where they are listed as beloved episodes.

Just speaking for me...I can watch any of the really good episodes time after time after time...when it comes to the mediocre ones from the 3rd season...I don't go out of my way to revisit them.

 

The funny thing is, as much as people bag on the 3rd season, a great number of things from that year really resonated with fans, especially during the glory days of 1970's syndication. I remember Starlog magazine and other fan publications reporting on the popularity of Gem from "The Empath" with Katheryn Hayes being a favorite con guest; the IDIC; Surak; the female Romulan commander...and in later years, Col, Green, the Tholians and Kahless being referenced. There was indeed great value to many people in that final year. And I find myself going to the third season far more often than I do the last half of the first.

When you go to reference books, you always see the same "fan favorite" episodes: "Space Seed" (which is mediocre and noteworthy only for Khan which really was because of after Star Trek 2), "Shore Leave," "This Side of Paradise," "City on the Edge of Forever," "Amok Time," "Mirror, Mirror," "Tribbles" and the other usual suspects. For years, the episode I heard most about was "The Menagerie." "Star Trek's only two part episode!" Eh, I don't put a lot of stock in that stuff. It took decades for "The Doomsday Machine" to get recognition. For years, it was overshadowed by comedies and Spock-centric tales. Yet, it is routinely placed in the top of fan favorites when asked today. It's just personal taste. One's dislike of an episode is no more or less valid than another's liking of same. It's all in good fun anyway. It's always interesting to get other fans' reads on the episodes. Good discussion!

 

I don't find TOS' "The Way To Eden" nearly as intolerable as the worst LIS episodes.

 

Since we're on the subject..."The Empath" remains one of the standouts from year 3. George Duning's musical score for that episode as was his work on "Metamorphosis", "Return to Tomorrow" and "Is There in Truth No Beauty", was truly unique and perfect for the Star Trek universe.

 

I'm ZapBrannigan and I approve this message. Jonathan Harris must have been mixed up if he said LIS had a three-day shooting schedule. And Ssosmcin's post goes on to check box after box of other things I agree with, right down to "Children" being my least favorite TOS episode.

 

A small correction to an earlier post. It's been stated that the pilot was used in the first five episodes, but really it was only used in four of those five. The second episode, "The Derelict", didn't use much footage from the pilot except for short inserts of the Jupiter 2 flying through space, and a quick shot of John Robinson writing in his diary with new narration.

The other four episodes, 1, 3, 4, and 5 all used big chunks of the pilot as their story, while #2 was more of a "new" episode detailing some of the Robinson's adventures in the hostile environment of outer space.

 

That is actually what I said. The initial comment was that it was used in the first six episodes, and I replied with a clarification. Although I'd forgotten that a tiny amount of pilot footage was used in "The Derelict."