"The Cage" told NBC they might have something special in their hands. "Where No Man..." proved they had something special in their hands.
The Cage or Where No Man Has Gone Before?
- Thread starter Terok Nor
- Start date
"The Cage" told NBC they might have something special in their hands. "Where No Man..." proved they had something special in their hands.
And season 2 was the part where Kirk wasn't being written like Pike anymore.
The role he's best known for was also reserved, but I think he laid the smackdown on some moneylenders....
..or the personal regret expressed in "The Naked Time," the weight of love and loss in "City on the Edge of Forever," the sort of wry reaction to the reunion with Finnegan in "Shore Leave," ...and on and on. Shatner & Kirk are night and day from Hunter and Pike.
I'm familiar with Hunter's pre-ST work and he was a good performer, but frankly, he never possessed as much range as Shatner. Hunter was firmly stuck in the less flexible "leading man" mold from the 50's, while other actors of the time--even bigger, established stars--opened up their emotional well to play characters from any part of society.
That was not Hunter's strong point, and he also lacked Shatner's skill at playing "regular" man, to calling on his well-known theatrical side to emphasize a scene. That went far in selling the series, and making Kirk one of the faces of the franchise.
I respect your extremely thoughtful, well developed arguments, but I find that I'm kind of scratching my head trying to reconcile the first and last lines that I culled from your post. What is the basis for your contention that Cage Trek would have been the better series when you just have presented the distinct impression that this iteration is self-contained, seemingly devoid of interest that would prompt viewers to see any attempts of a continuation, and that the captain, perforce the likely main driver of story lines going forward, is singularly unsuited to forcefully or effectively carry off that role?
I don't understand how you aren't being directly contradictory here. Please explain what I appear to be missing.
My angle here is that the pilot is a poor pilot for not wanting me to have more. But had there ever been an effort to do more, this would have succeeded despite the poor job done by the pilot - and would have given us adventures breaking out of the pilot mold, and necessarily and automatically so because the mold was so restrictive. I further feel that were a good fraction of those episodes to be written as carefully and intriguingly as the pilot, they would have produced a show superior (for me) to the more straightforward TOS we got.
But this is all about comparing the pilots, and the job they did in setting up or shooting down a glorious future. "Where No Man" just aimed high, pushed forward, and contained enough flaws to make me itch for improvement...
Er, yup. And knowing it was doomed to fall flat.
Timo Saloniemi
But this is all about comparing the pilots, and the job they did in setting up or shooting down a glorious future. "Where No Man" just aimed high, pushed forward, and contained enough flaws to make me itch for improvement...
Er, yup. And knowing it was doomed to fall flat.
Timo Saloniemi
Pike is only referred to because of a script shortage which "drafted" the pilot into service to fill a two-parter. If that shortcoming had not occurred, few would refer to "The Cage" as its events were not a component in that 1st season of a series that officially begins with Kirk's adventures.
So, if not for "The Menagerie," "The Cage" would simply be another unaired pilot--a curiosity, but not connected to the proper series.
The crucial one is the one which sold the series, with an actor that had a personal chemistry grafted to his character, which moved far in establishing ST's appeal.
This has branched off into quite an interesting discussion.
It is fascinating to debate whether Pike would or would not have had canon status. Or indeed, Gary Mitchell, Dr. Piper and Elizabeth Dehner. Pilot episodes with such dramatic changes are often never screened as part of the show proper, eg for example the BTVS pilot version which got reshot as ''Welcome To The Hellmouth''. But then again, the Star Trek pilot's were in an interesting position whereupon characters like the ship's doctor got recast, but also renamed, opening the door towards including the pilots as legitimate backstory.
The job of a pilot episode is to sell it to the network, not the viewers at home. Usually, this means that the pilot presentation is never intended for public consumption, and many pilots never make it to air in their original format. Star Trek, on the other hand, essentially asks us to accept both of the pilots as pre-series backstory, even though there are moments in both of them which don't tally with our understanding of the shows and characters that followed.
As the other thread about WNMHGB's dating attests, there are still debates to be had about where these two unique pieces of Star Trek ''fit'' into the whole tapestry.
It is fascinating to debate whether Pike would or would not have had canon status. Or indeed, Gary Mitchell, Dr. Piper and Elizabeth Dehner. Pilot episodes with such dramatic changes are often never screened as part of the show proper, eg for example the BTVS pilot version which got reshot as ''Welcome To The Hellmouth''. But then again, the Star Trek pilot's were in an interesting position whereupon characters like the ship's doctor got recast, but also renamed, opening the door towards including the pilots as legitimate backstory.
The job of a pilot episode is to sell it to the network, not the viewers at home. Usually, this means that the pilot presentation is never intended for public consumption, and many pilots never make it to air in their original format. Star Trek, on the other hand, essentially asks us to accept both of the pilots as pre-series backstory, even though there are moments in both of them which don't tally with our understanding of the shows and characters that followed.
As the other thread about WNMHGB's dating attests, there are still debates to be had about where these two unique pieces of Star Trek ''fit'' into the whole tapestry.
As the other thread about WNMHGB's dating attests, there are still debates to be had about where these two unique pieces of Star Trek ''fit'' into the whole tapestry.
The two pilots give the universe a sense of "history" it wouldn't of otherwise had. I never for a moment considered either non-canon. It is the job of other shows/movies/stories to work around them.
I'm not sure, but Justman & Solow claimed Roddenberry considered expanding the pilot (with new footage added) for the purpose of a theatrical release. I'm not sure when GR was considering this--before or after getting the greenlight to shoot the 2nd pilot.
Oh, Harvey.....
Lest I still be confused by how you are framing your comments, is your statement,"I further feel that were a good fraction of those episodes to be written as carefully and intriguingly as the pilot...." meant to say that these would have been the characteristics of the pilot if there had been a more committed effort when it was made and not the way it actually turned out? Otherwise, the description again seems to be at variance with your insistence a few lines earlier about how poorly executed the show was as a pilot.
Sorry if it seems I'm being overly dense in readily comprehending your remarks. Maybe if I visited your lovely country my misapprehensions would float away into the ether.
What does that even mean?
I'm not sure, but Justman & Solow claimed Roddenberry considered expanding the pilot (with new footage added) for the purpose of a theatrical release. I'm not sure when GR was considering this--before or after getting the greenlight to shoot the 2nd pilot.
Oh, Harvey.....
Sure...
This was after the second pilot offer. Note that all the actors' contracts on the first pilot covered theatrical exhibition -- there's even a memo reminding this to be covered in their contracts.
Still, that ``the second choice seems best for all reputations involved'' makes it sound a little like Roddenberry is suggesting Hunter pay a little for protection.
Naw... I really think the pilot was carefully and intriguingly written. It just didn't mean it would be a good pilot. (Say, War and Peace wouldn't be one, either.)
It was a pretty good hour or so of television, though, and hopefully the would-be series would have featured further good hours. Hopefully completely different from the pilot in terms of mood, plot twists and philosophical points raised, of course, rather than tired reruns... The "formula" of the pilot simply wouldn't have carried.
What, my English unperfect? I speak and type it like a naive!
Open book vs. closed one. Remember the Simpsons ep where Chief Wiggum and Moe get their spinoff, fighting in Lousiana swamps against some fat crime boss who at the conclusion of their "pilot" swims away at something like 0.5 mph? Alas, that is how you get a show going. Pike just floated, in a pond with no intriguing streams coming or going even. There was no mission, no future, no challenges in the horizon.
No doubt after the credits rolled, Pike got his retirement papers and started dealing in Orion slaves. End of that story.
Timo Saloniemi
Me fail English? Unpossible!
In answer to the original question, I much prefer Where No Man... And it's plain that it was the one that counts. The story was dramatic and hopeful. It had a great mix of compelling elements from friendship to fiendship, cognition to passion, philosophy to pugilism. The characters were dynamic. I can't think of a moment when it was dry. And ultimately it won the day.
All the conjecture of what The Cage may have brought as a series is just that: conjecture. If one's imagination is such that one envisions a Cage-yielding Star Trek being so superior to what actually happened, and one makes up stories about the Crew of the Enterprise under Pike to satisfy one's yen for an austere pseudo-Trek, so much the better, since someone like that seems obviously dissatisfied with the state of TOS as it exists.
Someone above stated that Pike and crew are only canon because of a script shortage. So be it. Whatever the reason, it is canon, in as much as the footage shown on the monitor in The Menagerie. When I watch The Cage, I see very little Star Trek in it with the exception of setting, familiar hardware, uniforms, vessels and a character with a passing physical resemblance to Mr. Spock.
Interesting. I've never seen that letter. Makes me think Gene might have had FEATURE stamped in the back of his brain the whole time. At the very least it's provinance of that intent after being turned down for a series.
In answer to the original question, I much prefer Where No Man... And it's plain that it was the one that counts. The story was dramatic and hopeful. It had a great mix of compelling elements from friendship to fiendship, cognition to passion, philosophy to pugilism. The characters were dynamic. I can't think of a moment when it was dry. And ultimately it won the day.
All the conjecture of what The Cage may have brought as a series is just that: conjecture. If one's imagination is such that one envisions a Cage-yielding Star Trek being so superior to what actually happened, and one makes up stories about the Crew of the Enterprise under Pike to satisfy one's yen for an austere pseudo-Trek, so much the better, since someone like that seems obviously dissatisfied with the state of TOS as it exists.
Someone above stated that Pike and crew are only canon because of a script shortage. So be it. Whatever the reason, it is canon, in as much as the footage shown on the monitor in The Menagerie. When I watch The Cage, I see very little Star Trek in it with the exception of setting, familiar hardware, uniforms, vessels and a character with a passing physical resemblance to Mr. Spock.
Similar threads
