NBC/CBS irony

[Trekfan12]

I'm currently reading William Shatner's Star Trek Memories book. I have only read the first chapter so far, about Gene Roddenberry and the process of how he got his idea for a Sci Fi show from inception to the TV show we know and love.
I learned so much and was amazed at how it even got on the air. The script was shown to many studios who passed on it. Desilu was in financial trouble and was looking for a project that would help keep them afloat. They accepted Star Trek but the next phase was finding a studio who wanted to air Star Trek. CBS had Gene come in to pitch the show. The meeting was different then other meetings he had in that the head of CBS was involved as well as other people. usually those meetings don't last that long, this one lasted about 3 hours and in the end CBS passed on it. But it wasn't long before Gene Roddenberry found out that the reason they wanted to meet with him was so they could pick his brain on his project and take his formula and create their own show, which turned out to be "Lost in Space."

And of course we know NBC took a chance on Star Trek and the rest of history. Gene never forgave CBS for what they did. I think it's ironic that CBS now has control of Star Trek, a show they rejected way back when.

I also wondered why, after so many fans wrote in to keep the show on the air after the 2nd season, that NBC and Paramount didn't realize what they had and instead of supporting the show they did everything they could to make sure they destroyed it. So sad.

 

[Harvey]

Much of what's written in Star Trek Memories should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I agree. I found "Inside Star Trek: The Real Story" by Herbert Solow was a huge eye opener about the making of... and the history of the production. It's a must read.
Star Trek didn't have the best of ratings in the late 1960's; when the show returned it didn't have Gene Coon, a producer who was a key ingredient to Star Trek, he was sorely missed.

Trekfan12, I love your avatar. Kirk's uniform looks so awesome in green.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I agree. I found "Inside Star Trek: The Real Story" by Herbert Solow was a huge eye opener about the making of... and the history of the production. It's a must read.

Agreed! Although I enjoyed Shatner's books (it was interesting to hear his perspective on things), Inside Star Trek is the better, more informative, (and I'd wager more accurate) effort.

Star Trek didn't have the best of ratings in the late 1960's; when the show returned it didn't have Gene Coon, a producer who was a key ingredient to Star Trek, he was sorely missed.

Yes. Coon doesn't get nearly enough credit for the show's success.

 

[Trekfan12]

I'll have to look for "Inside Star Trek" thanks

 

[Trekfan12]

I agree. I found "Inside Star Trek: The Real Story" by Herbert Solow was a huge eye opener about the making of... and the history of the production. It's a must read.
Star Trek didn't have the best of ratings in the late 1960's; when the show returned it didn't have Gene Coon, a producer who was a key ingredient to Star Trek, he was sorely missed.

Trekfan12, I love your avatar. Kirk's uniform looks so awesome in green.

Thanks, it one of my fave shot of them. I have the issue of EW, the avatar is a great angle and no words blocking the view

 

[ZapBrannigan]

The story about GR pitching to CBS is true, insofar as he did go to a meeting and do that, but according to INSIDE STAR TREK (Solow, Justman), he went into that situation before the show concept was fully prepared, and he bombed. This deprived STAR TREK of one of its three chances, because you don't get a second meeting to re-pitch what they've already rejected. It was a serious business mistake.

The part about CBS supposedly stealing GR's clever, money-saving production ideas for use in LOST IN SPACE, on the other hand? That embellishment came from GR's many tellings of the story in the 1970s, and I'm pretty sure it was just self-serving baloney. LOST IN SPACE was produced by Irwin Allen and 20th Century Fox, and they knew all the tricks of the trade long before Roddenberry came along.

 

[Trekfan12]

The story about GR pitching to CBS is true, insofar as he did go to a meeting and do that, but according to INSIDE STAR TREK (Solow, Justman), he went into that situation before the show concept was fully prepared, and he bombed. This deprived STAR TREK of one of its three chances, because you don't get a second meeting to re-pitch what they've already rejected. It was a serious business mistake.

The part about CBS supposedly stealing GR's clever, money-saving production ideas for use in LOST IN SPACE, on the other hand? That embellishment came from GR's many tellings of the story in the 1970s, and I'm pretty sure it was just self-serving baloney. LOST IN SPACE was produced by Irwin Allen and 20th Century Fox, and they knew all the tricks of the trade long before Roddenberry came along.

Thank you for setting things straight. There are plenty of stories told and you have to wonder where the truth lies.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

Much of what's written in Star Trek Memories should be taken with a grain of salt.

Or the entire salt shaker.

 

[Redfern]

Or the entire salt shaker.

Maybe a whole "salt lick" brick like deer consume.

 

[RandyS]

Much of what's written in Star Trek Memories should be taken with a grain of salt.

Agreed, but I believe this particular story was first presented in Stephen Whitfield's The Making of Star Trek from 1968, as well as Bob Justman's Inside Star Trek.

EDIT: I see everybody else beat me to it.

Oh well.

 

[STEPhon IT]

Thank you for setting things straight. There are plenty of stories told and you have to wonder where the truth lies.

Despite some here think of Gene Roddenberry, the man who created Star Trek and there wouldn't be anything STAR TREK without him, the man may have not been a saint and embellished a lot, but I am troubled these backhanded snide gives the impression he's a pathological liar and everything he says was false.
Studios borrow concepts all the time, and their defense was the project was currently under-development. It's possible CBS got a lot of ideas from Gene; they had assistants in the room recording and taking notes. I doubt the studio simply throws those notes away because they didn't like Roddenberry's pitch. Gene was a showman and large ego, but I can't blame him for fuming if he sees his concepts used for another show not his.

 

[Ghel]

I wouldn't blame Gene for being a liar, but memory is a tricky thing. This is why I generally take ANY autobiography or rendition of events worth a grain of salt. My guess around this event is that all things were slightly true but not the complete truth. Gene probably came to the meeting slightly unprepared but I also don't doubt that CBS execs were happy to listen to him for interesting ideas. Similarly, Harlan Ellison probably wrote a first draft of "City" that was outside of television budget and was prickly to work with but perhaps due to time pressure or whatever, Gene and Gene chose not to involve him in the rewrite process as much as they should have. Similarly, Shatner was probably a bit of a di** on set of Trek and perhaps fought for lines, but he, Nimoy, and Kelley were the stars of the show while the rest of the cast were bit players. The cast only truly became an ensemble cast in the films (if even then).

My point is that it's easy to point fingers in hindsite, but like most things, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of all of the stories told (both pro and con). As years and even decades pass, people tend to remember things in very distorted ways.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Despite some here think of Gene Roddenberry, the man who created Star Trek and there wouldn't be anything STAR TREK without him, the man may have not been a saint and embellished a lot, but I am troubled these backhanded snide gives the impression he's a pathological liar and everything he says was false.

That would not be such an issue if the man did not have a history of telling outright lies and/or taking credit for the work of others. He was an egomaniac, much like "car customizer to the stars" George Barris, who spend every year up to the time of his death spewing lies about famous TV and movie cars he had no part of creating.

It is difficult to trust his own history when he spent so many years modifying it to make himself larger than life.

Studios borrow concepts all the time, and their defense was the project was currently under-development. It's possible CBS got a lot of ideas from Gene; they had assistants in the room recording and taking notes. I doubt the studio simply throws those notes away because they didn't like Roddenberry's pitch. Gene was a showman and large ego, but I can't blame him for fuming if he sees his concepts used for another show not his.

Lost in Space--despite being a largely terrible series--was from a proven producer/director (Irwin Allen) with more credibility than Roddenberry at the time, and if Allen borrowed from any source, it was--ironically--from many of the same films Roddenberry ripped, such as Forbidden Planet, This Island Earth & The Day the Earth Stood Still. CBS, Allen or 20th Century Fox did not take anything from his Star Trek pitch to add to Lost in Space, and i've never found any of the Allen papers confirm that any sticky-fingered actions took place.

As others noted, this was more Roddenberry bull.

 

[STEPhon IT]

I wouldn't blame Gene for being a liar, but memory is a tricky thing. This is why I generally take ANY autobiography or rendition of events worth a grain of salt. My guess around this event is that all things were slightly true but not the complete truth. Gene probably came to the meeting slightly unprepared but I also don't doubt that CBS execs were happy to listen to him for interesting ideas. Similarly, Harlan Ellison probably wrote a first draft of "City" that was outside of television budget and was prickly to work with but perhaps due to time pressure or whatever, Gene and Gene chose not to involve him in the rewrite process as much as they should have. Similarly, Shatner was probably a bit of a di** on set of Trek and perhaps fought for lines, but he, Nimoy, and Kelley were the stars of the show while the rest of the cast were bit players. The cast only truly became an ensemble cast in the films (if even then).

My point is that it's easy to point fingers in hindsite, but like most things, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of all of the stories told (both pro and con). As years and even decades pass, people tend to remember things in very distorted ways.

And that's how I would like to think of it, but some members love sh*tting on the man as if they were witnesses to some of the things he said. He was a showman and will put himself in a better light in his point of view. Some make it sound like it's alien.

 

[Redfern]

I think the "tipping point" for some people was learning he may have raped Grace Lee Whitney. Tall tales are one thing, taking credit for others work, but sexual assault is just vile on all levels.

Sincerely,

Bill

 

[ZapBrannigan]

There's also the fact that GR kind of set himself up for this fall from grac-- I mean, reduction in stature. He nursed a personality cult into existence. For instance, his story about NBC supposedly opposing women in strong roles, with himself as the feminist hero, when it was really just him keeping Majel from finding out that she wasn't well-received as Number One. And more generally, his taking credit for the whole enchilada, when others such as Herb Solow had a lot to do with it.

The world of 1970s ST fandom was awash in Roddenberry worship, perhaps led by his own self-agrandizement, but greatly amplified by BNFs like David Gerrold, Joan Winston, Sondra Marshak, and Jacqueline Lichtenberg, who wrote of him so glowingly in their books you wouldn't believe it. And a lot of us believed, as kids. What naturally happens when we find out he was hugely flawed is, we rebound against him harder than we would have if he'd been humble all along. That's just human nature. We were played for fools and it stings a little.

That said, he did a lot for Star Trek, and I agree the reality checks shouldn't negate that fact.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

The part about CBS supposedly stealing GR's clever, money-saving production ideas for use in LOST IN SPACE, on the other hand? That embellishment came from GR's many tellings of the story in the 1970s, and I'm pretty sure it was just self-serving baloney.

So it was a story that Gene Roddenberry told in the 70s, then.

That would not be such an issue if the man did not have a history of telling outright lies and/or taking credit for the work of others. He was an egomaniac, much like "car customizer to the stars" George Barris, who spend every year up to the time of his death spewing lies about famous TV and movie cars he had no part of creating.

It is difficult to trust his own history when he spent so many years modifying it to make himself larger than life.

Everyone is the hero of their own story.

I didn't know that about Barris, though. Thanks for posting that link and opening my eyes a bit.

I think the "tipping point" for some people was learning he may have raped Grace Lee Whitney. Tall tales are one thing, taking credit for others work, but sexual assault is just vile on all levels.

Yep. I had a low opinion of Roddenberry already, what with the outright lying to make himself look good, repeating his lies even after he was called out on them, adding lyrics to the ST theme years after the fact just to swipe half of Alexander Courage's royalties, not bothering to show remorse when he was called out on that, showing blooper reels of TOS at conventions without the actors' consent, blatantly cheating on both of his wives, trying to cast his mistress in a leading role, casting an actress in the second pilot just so he could try to sleep with her, taking credit for others' accomplishments, betraying his friends, screwing D.C. Fontana and David Gerrold out of all the work they did co-creating TNG, letting his lawyer rewrite TNG episodes in blatant violation of Writer's Guild rules, having a nearly two decades-long affair with one of his employees, and letting his fanboy assistant run roughshod all over the Trek novels, but finding out that he was likely a rapist as well? That was the last straw for me.

So yeah, fuck that guy.

But I'm sure that the polished stone he gave to Grace Lee Whitney was really pretty.

 

[Trekfan12]

WOW certainly a lot of eye opening things that went on behind the scenes. A lot of stuff comes out after time, especially after someone dies. Even more stuff comes out. like the barn door being flung open. Thanks for educating me. GR gave us ST, but it's a shame what he did with all the people around him that made it a success. No truly great show like Star Trek (or any kind of success a person achieves) is ever done alone. It's nice if a person can be both grateful and humble. Too bad GR was neither. And hearing that Grace Lee Whitney was 'allegedly' raped.....makes me angry.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

The whole thing was a mess. Grace didn't want to publicly accuse GR, but she wanted to benefit from her dramatic story, so she wrote that she'd been assaulted by a Star Trek executive. That put a cloud of suspicion over a whole group of innocent men for years. It was pretty bad for them.

GR was a selfish and over-entitled louse with women, yes, but some of them actively rewarded his "hailing frequencies," if you will, and probably conditioned him to think he could have what he wanted from a Trek actress. Then I'd suspect that he had a few too many drinks and got out of control with Grace that one time.

It's not like he was a sadist or a career criminal, but we've been given to believe that he did one very bad thing, along with all the understandable self-promotion after getting a great TV show on the air and writing for it.