Sulu's partial absence due to John Wayne

[diankra]

A simple explanation for the misremembering would be if Takei signed for the role during the hiatus. Or maybe got it before NBC picked up season two, for an original set of dates that was then delayed as you suggest.

 

[CoveTom]

Interesting. A classy decision to withdraw from the 1980 race to protect his old colleagues' residuals.

It WOULD be classy if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not.

Network television series in the 1960's didn't pay residuals in perpetuity like they do today. Back then, actors got residuals for a set, and small, number of reruns, and then that was it. I believe with Star Trek it was something like the first three or four reruns, but I could be wrong on that point. Even so, it was a small number of them.

It has been well established by a large number of people involved in Trek that by the 70's even, the residuals were done. That's why the actors had such a difficult time in the 70's. They were all typecast, and couldn't easily find other work, and despite the fact that Trek was playing constantly, they weren't benefiting from it. Do you really think William Shatner would have had to live out of a camper and do regional theater if he was getting a check every time an episode of Trek aired?

Bottom line: By the time 1980 rolled around, none of the actors from Trek were earning anything from it, and having it pulled form this particular station wouldn't have cost them anything. The only thing that could have been impacted were residuals from Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which was only aired on the network, not by the local stations, and only a couple of times.

 

[Melakon]

Shatner discusses a lot of his hardships durng the lean years. He was doing anything he could to find work and pay his bills, alimony, and child support (the latter two determined based on his income while Star Trek was on network). That's why he did so many commercials in the early 70s.

 

[GSchnitzer]

Interesting. A classy decision to withdraw from the 1980 race to protect his old colleagues' residuals.

It WOULD be classy if it were true. Unfortunately, it's not.

Network television series in the 1960's didn't pay residuals in perpetuity like they do today. Back then, actors got residuals for a set, and small, number of reruns, and then that was it. I believe with Star Trek it was something like the first three or four reruns, but I could be wrong on that point. Even so, it was a small number of them.

It has been well established by a large number of people involved in Trek that by the 70's even, the residuals were done. That's why the actors had such a difficult time in the 70's. They were all typecast, and couldn't easily find other work, and despite the fact that Trek was playing constantly, they weren't benefiting from it. Do you really think William Shatner would have had to live out of a camper and do regional theater if he was getting a check every time an episode of Trek aired?

Bottom line: By the time 1980 rolled around, none of the actors from Trek were earning anything from it, and having it pulled form this particular station wouldn't have cost them anything. The only thing that could have been impacted were residuals from Star Trek: The Motion Picture, which was only aired on the network, not by the local stations, and only a couple of times.

Silly. Far more people receive reimbursement from residuals than just actors. While SAG residuals could well have run out by 1980, as I said in the article, other guilds (WGA, DGA, etc.) had residual payments still in effect.

 

[CoveTom]

Silly. Far more people receive reimbursement from residuals than just actors. While SAG residuals could well have run out by 1980, as I said in the article, other guilds (WGA, DGA, etc.) had residual payments still in effect.

Really? Because that's not what your article says. It says:

“It wasn’t just my earnings that were af-
fected,” Takei explains, referring to the
residuals the actors receive from reruns, “but
those of all the people involved in the show.”

"Referring to the residuals the actors receive from the reruns" seems pretty specific to me. And in 1980, the actors received exactly zero residuals from the reruns.

 

[Harvey]

^^
Be fair. That's a passage from Starlog quoted in the article (and note that it's the Starlog author, not Takei, that makes it specifically about actors). The rest of GSchnitzer's piece goes on to say:

Although any monies from residuals probably had long since dried up for members of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), members belonging to other guilds such as as the DGA, WGA, AFTRA, IATSE, ASCAP, or BMI, are also impacted by residual payments and might have stood to lose income if Star Trek had been pulled [off] the air to some degree.

 

[GSchnitzer]

^^
Be fair. That's a passage from Starlog quoted in the article (and note that it's the Starlog author, not Takei, that makes it specifically about actors). The rest of GSchnitzer's piece goes on to say:

Although any monies from residuals probably had long since dried up for members of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), members belonging to other guilds such as as the DGA, WGA, AFTRA, IATSE, ASCAP, or BMI, are also impacted by residual payments and might have stood to lose income if Star Trek had been pulled [off] the air to some degree.

Yes, the little "Log Entries" blurbs were compiled and edited by Starlog editor Ms. Susan Adamo. When Takei spoke generally about people losing income ("It wasn't just my earnings that were affected, but those of all the people involved in the show."), Ms. Adamo made a little slip and thought that such residual payments were limited to SAG members. In truth, other guilds were in play--not just actors.

It's a common misconception.

Find the Starlog issue here:

https://archive.org/details/starlog_magazine-043

(Harvey: I fixed my typo. Thanks.)