The great debate: Season 1 or 2?

[Mr_Homn]

Simple enough question.

Do you like season 1 or season 2 more, overall?


I understand that there are those out there who prefer season 3 the best (and season 3 certainly had some fantastic moments) but those people are in the minority.

I believe that those who prefer season 2 do so because it expands the cultures and ideas presented in season 1 and takes it to the next level.

Season 2 seems to me to be the first season of the star trek franchise to really start "building on itself" so to speak. Would anyone agree with that?

For example, Journey to Babel and Amok Time provide excellent depth to the Vulcan people, who were introduced in first season... It's building upon ideas more than creating new ones, which is great! Of course that doesn't mean season 2 didn't introduce new staples of trek, I just think the focus was more on expanding the depth of the star trek universe.

Whereas Season 1 was completely new, and Also much of the production values seemed higher for some reason (this would seem to be the opposite of what one would expect)... at least to me...There was more variety in the shots they used, they seemed a bit more experimental (for obvious reasons). the directing and cinematography just seemed better for some reason to me... Also, the show had more of a twilight zone vibe than later seasons, if you know what i mean. You witness some very unique camera angles in season 1 that you never see again. In season 1 all the music is new, where as much of it is rehashed in season 2... there are also minor differences that end up making a difference, somewhat subconsciously as well... for example, Kirk's hair in season 1 is the best IMO because of how well groomed he seems. In season 2, and ESPECIALLY season 3, he needs a damn haircut! His shorter hair makes him seem more stoic in my opinion... There are a lot of minor differences like that...

 

[Harvey]

Season 1, easily. It only has one outright awful episode -- "The Alternative Factor" -- and many great ones. Season 2 might have a few more episodes that are classics, but it was much more of a mixed bag.

In terms of production values, Star Trek had to afford contractually agreed upon raises each year for the cast and crew while producing episodes for the same amount of money each year. I don't know if I can see the difference between the first two seasons, but it definitely led to cuts, which got a lot worse in season 3.

 

[Mr_Homn]

In terms of production values, Star Trek had to afford contractually agreed upon raises each year for the cast and crew while producing episodes for the same amount of money each year. I don't know if I can see the difference between the first two seasons, but it definitely led to cuts, which got a lot worse in season 3.

Ah that's interesting, Didn't know it worked that way. I assumed it was a 2 year contract for the main cast because I've heard that's the way they are usually handled today in television. (Which is why so many characters are killed off or actors replaced at the end of season 2 in a lot of shows) I could be totally wrong about that, it's just what I've heard

 

[Harvey]

Actors usually sign 5-6 year contracts when they begin a series (all of the regulars on the original Star Trek had five year contracts with pay bumps that occurred with each new season; when Spock became the breakout character, Nimoy was able to negotiate for even more money for the second year than his contract promised).

I doubt there are many two-year contracts; studios like 5-6 because it prevents actors from immediately demanding huge raises when a show is a hit. When actors leave a television show after so short a period, it's probably due to other issues.

 

[Mr_Homn]

Actors usually sign 5-6 year contracts when they begin a series (all of the regulars on the original Star Trek had five year contracts with pay bumps that occurred with each new season; when Spock became the breakout character, Nimoy was able to negotiate for even more money for the second year than his contract promised).

I doubt there are many two-year contracts; studios like 5-6 because it prevents actors from immediately demanding huge raises when a show is a hit. When actors leave a television show after so short a period, it's probably due to other issues.

Ah, enlightening. Thanks for clearing that up. Definitely makes more sense than what I had heard before. Also, bonus points for not being snarky about it, as most forum posters are when correcting someone!

That said, it would perhaps explain why I seem to perceive season 2 as feeling ever so slightly cheaper than season 1.... Of course, not nearly as huge of a drop off from season 2 to 3, as we all know.

 

[Saul]

Season 1 just nailed it. Season 2 is great though, it just lacked something or focused a bit more on action.

 

[Mytran]

Season One, for many of the reasons already mentioned. In particular, the more serious tone from the first half of S1 really came across as tales of professionals in the military, who just happened to work in space.

 

[JoeD80]

Star Trek had to afford contractually agreed upon raises each year for the cast and crew while producing episodes for the same amount of money each year. I don't know if I can see the difference between the first two seasons, but it definitely led to cuts, which got a lot worse in season 3.

According to Inside Star Trek the budget was increased for season 2. But then it was cut when Paramount bought Desilu, and expenses that used to be covered by the studio overhead budget started being charged directly against the show. Then Paramount cut the budget further in season 3.

 

[barnaclelapse]

I guess I'd pick season two. A quick look through the episode list shows me more favorite episodes in that season than in the first one, but it's a pretty close call nonetheless.

 

[T'Bonz]

I really can't choose. Both had good shows and both had bad ones. They're even as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Harvey]

Star Trek had to afford contractually agreed upon raises each year for the cast and crew while producing episodes for the same amount of money each year. I don't know if I can see the difference between the first two seasons, but it definitely led to cuts, which got a lot worse in season 3.

According to Inside Star Trek the budget was increased for season 2. But then it was cut when Paramount bought Desilu, and expenses that used to be covered by the studio overhead budget started being charged directly against the show. Then Paramount cut the budget further in season 3.

Are you sure about the budget going up for the second season?

On pg. 98, discussing the first season, Herb Solow writes that, "Mission: Impossible and Star Trek were each roughly budgeted at nearly $200,000."

Then, on page 317, Solow writes that he at first approved a second season budget of $192,000, but then cut it down to $187,500 so Desilu would lose less money (like most studios producing telefilms at the time, they were deficit financing the series).

On page 329, Justman describes a meeting with Matt Jefferies prior to the second season in which he told him he had less money for sets due to cuts. Justman goes on to write, "All the other cash items took a beating: guest stars, supporting cast, extras, and set dressing and property purchases and rentals."

You're right about the Paramount takeover and the subsequent budget cuts. This is described on page 370. Not only was the budget reduced again (to $185,000), but "items that previously had been included as part of 'facilities and services' were now paid for -- in cash."

Then, in the third season, the budget was reduced to $178,500, due to Paramount's desire to lose as little as possible on the series (page 399). NBC actually paid more for the third season, but that didn't matter to Paramount, which didn't want to invest anything into what they viewed as a losing property.

 

[JimZipCode]

Season One, for many of the reasons already mentioned. In particular, the more serious tone from the first half of S1 really came across as tales of professionals in the military, who just happened to work in space.

YES!

Also I feel like s1 built more of a believable galaxy around the Enterprise, with episodes like Court Martial and Mudd's Women, etc.

 

[Enterprise is Great]

Except for the DVDs I would never even know the difference between season 1 and 2 as both seasons seem about the same to me. I can almost always spot a season 3 episode just from watching it. I'll take a guess and say season one over season two.

 

[Maurice]

...Also, bonus points for not being snarky about it, as most forum posters are when correcting someone!...

Harvey's a class act.

 

[plynch]

There's something about a show when it doesn't have the routine down pat yet. S2 really establishes the Trek universe, yes, but they're cranking them out a bit too efficiently. My pref: S1: the moody music, the greater danger-vibe, the more crew scattered around the ship, the Baileys and Rileys, the bridge lighting, etc.

I know it is gauche to compliment GR around these parts, but wasn't the first half of S1 under his direct control? Maybe he actually had some skills, especially as a story editor and writer, after all?

 

[sonak]

season 2. Most of the best episodes of TOS were in that season: TWT, APOTA, Amok Time, JTB, Doomsday Machine, Assignment Earth, etc. TOS was just firing on all cylinders that season.(the occasional "omega glory" aside)

 

[Lance]

Season One. S2 has got higher highs on the whole, but S1 is a more balanced (and believable) package.

 

[Harvey]

...Also, bonus points for not being snarky about it, as most forum posters are when correcting someone!...

Harvey's a class act.

Why, thank you.

 

[JoeD80]

Then, on page 317, Solow writes that he at first approved a second season budget of $192,000, but then cut it down to $187,500 so Desilu would lose less money

The $192,000 figure was the one that I was thinking of. I forgot that he cut it during the Desilu run. Was just going by memory since I don't own the book any more.

 

[Harvey]

No worries. The book isn't searchable online, so it's entirely possible that I missed a detail skimming through it again, too. But I think I managed to pull all the pertinent quotations.