The Roddenberry Reputation

[Nerys Myk]

The point is it's not the same situation as having a second pilot ordered after the first pilot was rejected by the very same people, which was the context of the conversation above.

I believe the show was "rejected" by CBS, the same network which later approved the Dick Van Dyke version. The original version was shown in 1961 as part of an anthology series called The Comedy Spot. Happy Days followed a similar path. It's original pilot was shown as part of Love American Style.

imdb ( yeah I know) has this write up:

The pilot tanked, but the network liked the concept, so it was rewritten and recast with Dick Van Dyke playing the lead role, Mary Tyler Moore as his wife and Reiner as the bullying series star Alan Brady.

 

[Daddy Todd]

To be exact, "The Cage" cost $615,781.56.00.

"Where No Man Has Gone Before" cost $354,974.00.

The decrease in cost can probably be credited to the second pilot being shorter (50 min. vs. 78 min.), start-up costs not incurred by the second pilot (sets, costumes, props, research/development, etc.), and the crew having the experience of the first pilot under their belt.

Except that The Cage is 63 1/2 minutes, not 78, and the original "pilot" cut of WNM is 52 1/2 minutes, so it's only 11 minutes shorter.

 

[Harvey]

Inside Star Trek repeatedly lists the 78 minute running time (for an intended 90 minute time slot), although it isn't that long on home video. I wonder if that is an inaccurate report of the running time or the result of editing on the current version?

Even if the book gets it wrong, 11 minutes isn't insignificant on a television shooting schedule. Keep in mind that the first pilot took roughly 16 days to shoot; the second pilot took roughly 8 (although Solow and Justman say 9, IIRC).

 

[CoveTom]

I'm not sure what's so confusing about the WNM costing more than The Cage.

When The Cage was made, literally everything had to be built from scratch. When WNM was filmed, 90% of the sets were reused, costumes were reused, the model of the Enterprise was reused, effects shots were reused, etc. They had a ton of savings in being able to use elements that were created for The Cage. That's the reason why the episode costs so much less.

 

[Harvey]

Who said it was confusing? Start-up costs obviously were spent on the first pilot that didn't need to be spent on the second; I indicated as much. They're not the only factor, though.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

My issue has always been that Picard seems very Captain-as-King in 'tude, which is very retro and not enlightened 24thcentury at all. Whereas Kirk is not afraid of showing his emotions a lot of the time, so while he has his great quiet powerful moments (Balance of Terror, CHARLIE X), most remember stuff like RISK IS OUR BUSINESS from RtT or, more painfully, SHE'S HUMAN! from Requiem.)

Kirk and Sisko (and Janeway even when I was able to watch VOYAGER) seemed military commander-like, whereas Picard vacillated between King and diplomat. The others could incorporate those aspects while still seeming to be in the service, but Picard ... well, suffice to say I'm not a fan.

Po-tay-to, po-ta-to. Both men are different commanders, jut like both are different men. This doesn't mean that Picard has no emotions or won't smile or express his feelings, he just does it in a different way. At least Picard cried his eyes out when it counted ('Sarek' and Star Trek: Generations, ). Kirk (or rather, his savage half) only shows real emotion when confronted.

Q WHO and TAPESTRY and the end of ALL GOOD THINGS show promise at what COULD have been with Picard, but I have always seen him as a missed opportunity. (also kind of wished they HAD let Q serve as their Exec for awhile, because 1st season Riker was such a damned tourist!)

Having an arrogant God-being serve as a member of the crew of a starship would have been a cheat, especially since said being (Q) had a lot to learn than he thought Picard did (as shown in the latter two episodes of Voyager he was on.) As for Janeway, she's the first female captain ever on a Star Trek show; having her act like a typical female in the emotional department would have been disastrous, and would have gotten a ton of nasty mail from a lot of female Trek fans, telling the producers that she should toughen up.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

At least Picard cried his eyes out when it counted ('Sarek' and Star Trek: Generations, ). Kirk (or rather, his savage half) only shows real emotion when confronted.

He cried in other episodes (ex. "Family"). I guess he was fond of tears.

Kirk: He was shaking/shattered immediately after Edith's death, deeply depressed after Rayna's breakdown, grim and sad after Aurelan's death, and sad/thoughtful after Gary Mitchell's death.

Did he need to stream rivers like Picard in order for it to qualify as "real emotion" when everyone does not express/react the same way?

 

[trevanian]

My issue has always been that Picard seems very Captain-as-King in 'tude, which is very retro and not enlightened 24thcentury at all. Whereas Kirk is not afraid of showing his emotions a lot of the time, so while he has his great quiet powerful moments (Balance of Terror, CHARLIE X), most remember stuff like RISK IS OUR BUSINESS from RtT or, more painfully, SHE'S HUMAN! from Requiem.)

Kirk and Sisko (and Janeway even when I was able to watch VOYAGER) seemed military commander-like, whereas Picard vacillated between King and diplomat. The others could incorporate those aspects while still seeming to be in the service, but Picard ... well, suffice to say I'm not a fan.

Po-tay-to, po-ta-to. Both men are different commanders, jut like both are different men. This doesn't mean that Picard has no emotions or won't smile or express his feelings, he just does it in a different way. At least Picard cried his eyes out when it counted ('Sarek' and Star Trek: Generations,

and I find his work in SAREK and GEN to be painful to watch and almost as lacking in credibility as his tantrum in FC. FAMILY works, barely. Even though Frakes seemed almost like an amateur in the cast 1st season, in later years his quiet effective emotional moments, like the scene aboard the BoP in the mess hall 2nd season, and especially with Data at the end of LEGACY (probably the best moment in the series for me), trump everything Stewart did on Trek. And Yeah, I'm definitely one of those guys who would have been very happy to have seen TNG with Riker as Captain 4th season.

 

[Amaris]

Picard is authoritarian. Riker is more laid back, and tough as nails when he has to be. Riker is, in a sense, Kirk. Picard's command style is more formal, though he is more relaxed when among friends and compatriots. I admire that in him, and as much as I like James T. Kirk, I'd rather serve under Picard.

 

[CoveTom]

and I find his work in SAREK and GEN to be painful to watch and almost as lacking in credibility as his tantrum in FC. FAMILY works, barely. Even though Frakes seemed almost like an amateur in the cast 1st season, in later years his quiet effective emotional moments, like the scene aboard the BoP in the mess hall 2nd season, and especially with Data at the end of LEGACY (probably the best moment in the series for me), trump everything Stewart did on Trek. And Yeah, I'm definitely one of those guys who would have been very happy to have seen TNG with Riker as Captain 4th season.

I do agree that Frakes' work as Riker is woefully underrated. I think he did some fantastic stuff with the character, and is good both as an actor and a director.

That being said, I can't help but disagree with you about Patrick Stewart and the power of his performances. While I did dislike the Generations material, it wasn't due to his performance, but rather the fact that I thought it was out of place and unnecessary in the film. I thought his work in Sarek and Family, both, was extremely well done.

I'm curious, though... What did you think of his work in "Chain of Command"? I consider that Stewart's best performance of his entire Trek career.

 

[trevanian]

Good point, I have seen CHAINS a number of times and thought it was very solid work.

I had a great deal of respect for Stewart pre-TNG, from DUNE and EXCALIBUR and some British TV stuff, but it was only after a few eps of TNG that I started thinking he wasn't bringing him best game consistently -- in fact during season 2, based on what often sounded like a perpetual nose cold, I was wondering if he was on cocaine, because it reminded me of how Heather Thomas used to sound in the mid80s (probably the only time she and Stewart will wind up in the same sentence!)

But put a Wendy Hughes or John DeLancie on camera with him and things definitely improved - Warner is a classic example of same.

 

[Mark Graham]

In These Are The Voyages, Volume I, Grace Lee Whitney is quoted as saying that she and Roddenberry never had sex. So that would seem to eliminate Roddenberry as her rapist. Examine the language she quotes during the event. It should narrow down the possibilities.

 

[1001001]

In These Are The Voyages, Volume I, Grace Lee Whitney is quoted as saying that she and Roddenberry never had sex. So that would seem to eliminate Roddenberry as her rapist. Examine the language she quotes during the event. It should narrow down the possibilities.

First, welcome to the board.

Second, please take some time to review the rules for posting here, pinned at the top of this forum. Specifically the one regarding resurrecting dead threads.

This one has been dead over 9 years. Let’s let it Rest In Peace, shall we?