Which would have been saying something interesting about human nature. Can't have that in prime time, 1967.
The Final "City"
- Thread starter RobertScorpio
- Start date
Which would have been saying something interesting about human nature. Can't have that in prime time, 1967.
Well, that would make Kirk one cold and callous bastard when we see him back to his cocky self later on, now wouldn't it? At the very least, it'd be tough to continue to command the same level of respect from Spock and McCoy if Kirk was willing to flush their asses down the cosmic toilet for the sake of some 20th Century mission worker he'd just met.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
yes..I totally agree...
There is a reason this episode is considered the best TOS episode ever...because it is good, very good, as told and filmed. Ellison's ending is not as dramatic, and, it fills the hour with too much material...I am very glad that my name sake, Asimov, got them to focus this show on K/S, and to some degree, McCoy...
There is a difference in writing books and producing a TV show. And I think, as much as I disagreed with GR on some of his decisions, he was still a far better producer than Ellison ever could have hoped to be..
Rob Scorpio
trevanian
Rear Admiral
Are you kidding? That is the friendship capable of surviving everything.
Hey, if Kirk's crew can trust him after ENEMY WITHIN, anything goes.
But more to this case, if you haven't met somebody who for a time you didn't think was worth losing everything for, it is IMO your loss.
The coda at the end of THE WIND & THE LION kinda echoes this (as does REQUIEM FOR METHUSELAH) ... The Connery character Raisuli has committed a huge bluff with kidnapping of an American woman with the intent of embarassing certain folks, threatening (never seriously) to kill her. Ultimately, he returns her after some mutual respect earning, and she in turns saves him, but his whole way of life is destroyed by the intrusion of western imperial forces (well, it was on its way with the start of the 20th century anyway.)
At the end, Raisuli is with his second, at a beach, and the guy says, it is as you said, great raisuli, all is drifting away on the wind, we have lost everything. And Raisul replies, have you not once found something worth losing everything for? (then they share a hearty manly bonding laugh and the credits go up.)
Actually seems more like that MERCHANT parable in EMPATH, now that I think about it.
EDIT ADDON: this might be more interesting than the thread that got closed in lit on this subject, which is saying a lot.
No, it wouldn't make him "cold and callous."
It'd make him a human being whose emotions can sometimes get the better of him. Real feelings. Selfish feelings. Human feelings.
Moreover, especially in that first season, Kirk wasn't just "cocky." We'd seen him be calculating and manipulative in "Conscience of a King." I'd even say he is cold and callous in his treatment of Lenore, playing her emotions as a means to an end. We'd seen him full of self-doubt with a hint of self-loathing in "Balance of Terror." Hell, we'd later see him willing to place his beloved ship and crew in harm's way in season two's "Obsession."
Hardly the "cocky self" and cowboy/galactic playboy stereotype the character has been saddled with for 40 years.
Honestly, I don't think you understand the depths or insights of Ellison's original script. Spock in the tag seems more than understanding of Kirk's emotions and provides the script with its final, poetic insight. I repeat it again:
"No woman was ever loved as much,
Jim. Because no woman was ever
offered the universe for love."
Spock even offers Kirk the chance to recoup on his Vulcan homeworld. No respect is lost. There is a new found understanding of each other. In all the tomorrows and yesteryears, Kirk's love will be always and eternal like the stars themselves. Spock understands this and Kirk still has his command; hurt and wounded, but living.
Which would have been saying something interesting about human nature. Can't have that in prime time, 1967.
Fo'sho.
Unfortunately, some would prefer their heroes safe creatures who can only be challenged physically and not emotionally.
"You deliberately stopped me! I could have saved her! Do you realize what you just did!?!"
"He knows, Doctor. He knows."
"He knows, Doctor. He knows."
Yep, Ellison's version was better.
Effective, but not as poetic as what Spock says at the end of Ellison's draft with the final shot of the stars like Kirk's love, eternal. At the end of the aired version, I feel sorry for what's happened to Kirk. In Ellison's, I ache and bleed for Kirk because of what he couldn't do. Because he was in love.
We're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this one. I think it was a lot more effective, dramatic, and, dare I say it? heroic, for Kirk to sacrifice Edith for the sake of those millions who weren't supposed to die and the billions yet to follow, even though it was clearly ripping his heart out to do it.
That's kind of what makes him a hero and not some shlub off the street.
That's kind of what makes him a hero and not some shlub off the street.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
The test? Ask any WOMAN what they think what was sadder...Kirk letting her die, or him freezing up...I have asked this of my wife, her sister, her mom, my friends wife..ALL of them said it was sadder to let kirk be the one who stopped McCoy from saving her life....
Why would the opinion of a woman matter so much? Well, because it is, at the heart, a love story...about a man who lets the only woman he will love..die...so as to save a much better future for all of mankind..By far more dramatic, and, more heroic..
Picard? Yeah, he would have frozen because, come on, he wasn't half the hero Kirk was...
Kirk was a hero..you may not like that fact, but that is how he was written, and THAT is why, decades later, it is CAPTAIN KIRK who defines Star Trek to the normal people..not Picard...Not Sisko..Not Janeway..Not Archer...KIRK.
Rob
Scorpio
There's a fallacy in your suggestion that a woman is the final authority on a well-crafted, non-Harlequin love story. Men have been the purveyors of romance for centuries; writing some of the most tragic and heart-wrenching stories and poetry.
Machismo and all that poser BS aside, men can be just as appreciative of a "love story" like COTEF. That's why Ellison's script remains my favorite unfilmed Trek and the aired episode my favorite episode of all of Trek. Which do I prefer? Well, I've already answered that in my previous posts.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
Absolutely Right(TM). The "woman's opinion" angle to this argument is a non-starter.
It's hardly flawless or expert and presumes that women are the only ones capable of judging the effectiveness of a "love story." It's a gross generalization at best.
You're trying to appeal to the supposed authority of the female over all things romantic and heartfelt, which is a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad verecundiam. Your statement, or claim, assumes that women, by their very nature, are final authorities on matters of the heart. Thus, they are the final say on this argument of which ending -- first draft script or aired episode -- is better.
Any ladies care to comment on this?
A few thoughts, for what they're worth.
That the ending is "sadder" to some doesn't make it better. Was the point of the story that Kirk is grief stricken in the end? If so, it's arguably worse that he lets her die.
On the other hand, in Ellison's script while it's Spock that stops Beckwith, Kirk doesn't move to save Edith, either. So, in a way, he still makes that decision, but more through inaction than action.
That the ending is "sadder" to some doesn't make it better. Was the point of the story that Kirk is grief stricken in the end? If so, it's arguably worse that he lets her die.
On the other hand, in Ellison's script while it's Spock that stops Beckwith, Kirk doesn't move to save Edith, either. So, in a way, he still makes that decision, but more through inaction than action.
Last edited:
So then is anyone's opinion as being worth more or less on the matter.
For what it's worth, I read the script years ago and don't recall being so impressed with it that I found it better than what aired. For instance, it had some clunky dialogue that just didn't "sound" right for various characters, and the plotting was more appropriate for a short story than essentially a four-act play.
Now, I prefer dialogue to be a little more meaty and theatrical and plotting not to be so formulaic as it often is; there's beauty in word and action that goes beyond the bare essentials to give a show a life of its own. But Ellison's script felt more like something he'd originally intended for a different venue, either as a reworked short story or something standalone, say, as a long Outer Limits or Omnibus presentation, with a spaceship crew but not our heroes.
And heroes they were -- flawed, but not to the degree of having the wealth of antisocial tendencies or deep-seated psychological or emotional hang-ups of so many heroes today. In this respect, they were role models, just as the real astronauts of the 60s were, an idea that seems less popular now than then. Ellison's script lacked much of this gloss and spirit. It was a Clint Eastwood western contrasted to a John Wayne one. At least that's what it seemed like while I read it. Who knows how it might have turned out had it been filmed verbatim, but I suspect it wouldn't have been superior to what we got.
^^^Ellison's dialogs are not clunky. In fact, they're far more naturalistic sounding than Star trek usually got. There are some lines that aren't in the character's voices per se, but that's not uncommon for a first draft.
And let's remember, the script we get to read is a first draft...and for a first draft, it's brilliant.
And let's remember, the script we get to read is a first draft...and for a first draft, it's brilliant.
^Moreover, Ellison's dialogue is poignant in the right places and at the right time. It's not as forced as some of the lines in the aired version, most notably the horrid Edith Keeler good-good speech.
trevanian
Rear Admiral
The idea that the Spock Kirk stuff isn't in character is because the characters hadn't been defined at that point ... of course things would get tweaked, like the bit about humans hitting space 200 years ahead of the vulcans. The thing is, I can imagine Nimoy and Shatner playing those lines even as different characters (one reason why I wish Nimoy had done a BOSTON LEGAL), so the Ellison draft really does LIVE for me, even though it is only on the page. Spock's stuff about human savagery is material I'd like to hear from Nimoy, if only in a radio show reading ...
NOW THERE is an idea ... Shatner and Nimoy READING the Ellison draft, or performing it. Would that go any little ways toward mending various fences, like Shat & Ellison?
Probably not, but it is a nice holiday sentiment (something you'll rarely get from me, since I'm usually firmly in the FUCK XMAS side of things.)
I read a paragraph on Ellison's site from him about QUANTUM OF SOLACE that indicated he still has the old fire (not that I agree with him on that one), no surprise there.
Be good PR for the movie too
Similar threads
