Time Frame From Star Trek 2 - 4

[USS KG5]

Star Trek 2 was in 2283 for Kirk's 50th birthday, but it would seem that the events of the next following movies were right after TWOK from one movie to the next so that must mean the 3 movies took place at the same time.

You can take a bit of license with each.

Between 2 and 3, the Enterprise has time to go to Ceti Alpha V to pick up Reliant's crew, drop off most of her trainees, and for Spock's death to enter the long term grief phase. Say anything between a couple of weeks and three months?

Between 3 and 4 I'd infer they have been on Vulcan for at least a few months, enough time to completely refit the bridge, for Spo.k to be re-educated and so on. Maybe anything from about 3 months to a year?

 

[USS KG5]

That Nutty Fanboy: What happened to off-world Vulcans? The lines in the movie indicate 10.000 survivors overall, which seems rather low for a space-faring species – especially that very likely have off-world colonies.. or was the 10.000-line pointed towards survivors escaping Vulcan itself?

BobOrci: True. Let’s just say then that the 10,000 does not count off worlders!

10,000 is pretty good going for evacuating from a planet that was blowing up in minutes when the leaders of said planet did not seem to know how bad things were.

 

[Christopher]

Between 2 and 3, the Enterprise has time to go to Ceti Alpha V to pick up Reliant's crew, drop off most of her trainees, and for Spock's death to enter the long term grief phase. Say anything between a couple of weeks and three months?

A good thought, but I'm not sure Kirk's line "The death of Spock is like an open wound" fits the "long-term grief phase" idea. (Actually the script -- and the novel and comic adaptations -- had the scene of the Grissom discovering Spock's intact torpedo tube on Genesis first, followed by the initial Enterprise scene; Kirk's log entry was originally "The news of Spock's tube is like an open wound." That would've allowed for more passage of time, because the news could've reawakened pain that the crew was recovering from.

Also, as I mentioned before, given how swiftly Spock regenerated on Genesis, a longer interval raises the question of why it took so long for his regeneration to begin.

Between 3 and 4 I'd infer they have been on Vulcan for at least a few months, enough time to completely refit the bridge, for Spo.k to be re-educated and so on. Maybe anything from about 3 months to a year?

Again, the log entry is the problem. Kirk specifically said they were in the third month of their Vulcan exile, which limits it to 2-3 months after the end of The Search for Spock.

 

[Greg Cox]

It's interesting. I suspect that Edith gets elevated above all of Kirk's other one-shot love interests and endless string of old flames simply because "City" is such a classic episode and the love story is more poignant and central to the plot than, say, Kirk's reunion with that chick in "The Deady Years" or whatever. And, of course, there's that ending . . . .

Tragic love stories are probably always going to be more memorable. See Romeo and Juliet, Tristan and Isolde, Casablanca, Titanic, etc.

Plus, Shatner and Collins just had better chemistry, and the relationship felt more fleshed-out and convincing, than most of the other one-shot romances. (Miramanee gets points for actually marrying Kirk, though.)

 

[Timo]

We don't absolutely have to believe in a "bridge refit", of course. Rather, it could be that ST3 showed the Indiscriminate Gunnery and Intelligence Operations Center of master spy Kruge's armed recce vessel, and the steering wheel was located elsewhere altogether. It would be just like Kruge to lead from a facility in the aft hull, when Klingon skippers of the more traditional Kahlessian ilk would sit with their comrades in the wheelhouse at the bow...

Note also that the dialogue almost directly contradicts the idea that our heroes would have refitted anything. Scotty is still having to cope with Klingon writing, remember? He'd surely have removed/omitted that if he had been rebuilding the ship.

I see no problem with a bit less than three Earth months being the length of the exile, then ("we are on our third month", plus the fact that Vulcan doesn't have a moon to give it native units of time of that name).

Tragic love stories are probably always going to be more memorable.

And from Kirk's point of view, he didn't have the chance to get bored with Edith and sneak away from her...

Timo Saloniemi

 

[22 Stars]

It's interesting. I suspect that Edith gets elevated above all of Kirk's other one-shot love interests and endless string of old flames simply because "City" is such a classic episode and the love story is more poignant and central to the plot than, say, Kirk's reunion with that chick in "The Deady Years" or whatever. And, of course, there's that ending . . . .

Tragic love stories are probably always going to be more memorable. See Romeo and Juliet, Tristan and Isolde, Casablanca, Titanic, etc.

Plus, Shatner and Collins just had better chemistry, and the relationship felt more fleshed-out and convincing, than most of the other one-shot romances. (Miramanee gets points for actually marrying Kirk, though.)

I agree, and the added bonus of Joan Collins being a 'name' actress, so both her character and real name are remembered by a variety of viewers. Also, Keeler is from Earth, and Earth of the recent past, so we can identify with her a bit more as well.

Every great hero needs a special villain, and a special heroine and Edith holds that place for Kirk in the eyes of many classic Trek fans.

 

[Greg Cox]

Plus, the episode itself builds her up a lot. She's not just some blonde cheesecake in a skimpy outfit; the episode goes out its way to portray her as a visionary humanitarian who is way ahead of her time. And a strong, independent woman worthy of Kirk's respect and admiration.

(Okay, she was also going to cause the Nazis to take over the world, but nobody's perfect . . . .)

 

[Christopher]

Plus, the episode itself builds her up a lot. She's not just some blonde cheesecake in a skimpy outfit; the episode goes out its way to portray her as a visionary humanitarian who is way ahead of her time. And a strong, independent woman worthy of Kirk's respect and admiration.

Honestly, I've recently come to feel that Joan Collins was miscast in the role. Edith shouldn't have been this glamorous beauty with a posh English accent -- she should've been a harder-edged, scrappier, no-nonsense type. As scripted, Edith isn't just a starry-eyed idealist, but someone tough and skeptical and realistic enough to handle the burden of running a Depression-era shelter/soup kitchen and keep its patrons in line. A line like "If you're a bum, if you can't break off of the booze or whatever it is that makes you a bad risk, then get out" just isn't entirely convincing in Collins's dainty, rarefied voice, or at least isn't as effective as it could've been coming from an actress with more of an edge.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ That's true. And from what I've read, she doesn't even understand, or correctly remember, the character herself. I read an interview where she said something about her character thinking the Nazis were great, or something like that.

Plus Joan Collins is by all accounts a complete wagon (great Dublin term of abuse).

 

[22 Stars]

Plus, the episode itself builds her up a lot. She's not just some blonde cheesecake in a skimpy outfit; the episode goes out its way to portray her as a visionary humanitarian who is way ahead of her time. And a strong, independent woman worthy of Kirk's respect and admiration.

Honestly, I've recently come to feel that Joan Collins was miscast in the role. Edith shouldn't have been this glamorous beauty with a posh English accent -- she should've been a harder-edged, scrappier, no-nonsense type. As scripted, Edith isn't just a starry-eyed idealist, but someone tough and skeptical and realistic enough to handle the burden of running a Depression-era shelter/soup kitchen and keep its patrons in line. A line like "If you're a bum, if you can't break off of the booze or whatever it is that makes you a bad risk, then get out" just isn't entirely convincing in Collins's dainty, rarefied voice, or at least isn't as effective as it could've been coming from an actress with more of an edge.

I feel the opposite, the casting against 'type' works for me and avoids many of the obvious cliches such as the ones you mentioned. She is supposed to be a bit of an outsider there on the mean streets, a savior with a vision and carriage beyond her circumstance.

Also, I don't think a scrappier hard-edged character would be up to the task of talking the President out of WWII. I think the the fineness and class that Collins brings to the role is perfect, and has stood the test of time.

 

[22 Stars]

(Okay, she was also going to cause the Nazis to take over the world, but nobody's perfect . . . .)

Lol, maybe she was friends with Walt Disney! Too soon?

Seriously, the end of that episode says it all where Edith fits in the pantheon. I always wished we would see old Spock, presiding over a funeral for Kirk, in the 1930's, revealing his final place next to Edith.

 

[Christopher]

^ That's true. And from what I've read, she doesn't even understand, or correctly remember, the character herself. I read an interview where she said something about her character thinking the Nazis were great, or something like that.

Well, it's easy to forget details about a one-week guest-star gig decades after the fact. Heck, I just recently watched an interview where Leonard Nimoy talked about Mission: Impossible, a show he was a regular on for two seasons right after Star Trek ended, and it surprised me how much he misremembered or didn't remember at all about that show. He thought it ran for eight years instead of seven; he thought he worked with Lesley Ann Warren in the first of his two seasons instead of the second; and he didn't remember any episodes in which his character got any backstory or personal life, even though there was a major one in season 5 that revealed a fair amount of his background including a tragic love affair and a mentor who betrayed him.

Granted, Nimoy's drinking problem at the time (and for some years thereafter) could account for the memory loss. Still, I can't blame Collins for not retaining the details of what to her was just one temp job out of hundreds.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Fair enough - but the more I think of this, it wasn't actually just an interview in a magazine, it may actually have been for a tv programme about Star Trek. You'd think if someone contacted her and said 'we want to interview you about this episode', she'd bother trying to remind herself what it was about before going on camera!

Edit: Here we are

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_City_on_the_Edge_of_Forever_(episode)

With regards to "The City on the Edge of Forever", Joan Collins has stated, "To this day, people still want to talk about that episode – some remember me for that more than anything else I've done. I am amazed at the enduring popularity of Star Trek and particularly of that episode." Collins adds, "At the time none of us would have predicted the longevity of the show. I couldn't be more pleased – or more honored – to be part of Star Trek history." (Star Trek 30 Years) Ms. Collins' memory of her Trek experience seems hazy, however. In her 1985 autobiography, Past Imperfect (p. 248) she makes a few errors regarding the episode: for example, in addition to the common mistake of referring to Mr. Spock as Dr. Spock, she identifies her character as Edith Cleaver instead of Edith Keeler, and she also claims that Spock, not Kirk, allowed her character to be killed – a plot point that was not in the version of the script that was actually shot. Most significantly, she claims Edith tried to "prove to the world that Hitler was a nice guy." Harlan Ellison objected to Collins' assessment, as that was not what the pacifist Edith ever tried to do

 

[Greg Cox]

Still, I can't blame Collins for not retaining the details of what to her was just one temp job out of hundreds.

Honestly, I've run into that myself. People come up to me at cons and ask me questions about books I wrote years and years ago, and I'm often foggy about the details. "Er, sorry, but that was seventeen books ago . . . ."

On a related note, check out the actors' commentary on the DVD of the first UNDERWORLD movie. Kate Beckinsale ends up teasing Scott Speedman about just how little he seems to remember about the plot only a year or so later. "This is a movie called Underworld, Scott. You were in it, remember?"

Going back even further, Boris Karloff was once on a game show where he couldn't remember the name of a character that he killed in the original Frankenstein . . . .

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ But if you were going to be interviewed for a tv special about them you'd brush up on them, wouldn't you?!

 

[doubleohfive]

Who cares? I don't remember what I was doing yesterday, let alone 20 years ago. Expecting people like Nimoy or Collins to remember details from jobs they had 20, 30 years ago is ridiculous.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ As I said before, if you're specifically invited to go and speak about something on tv special (and probably paid for it too), you might actually bother your arse to brush up on it and not go on air and give a completely inaccurate and misleading account.

 

[Greg Cox]

^ But if you were going to be interviewed for a tv special about them you'd brush up on them, wouldn't you?!

Possibly, depending on what else you had going on and what your schedule was like.

It's worth remembering that appearing on TV is probably no big deal to Joan Collins. She's doubtless done countless talk shows and interviews over the years, about everything from Dynasty to whatever her latest project is. For her, "being interviewed for a tv special" is like going out for pizza . . . she may not feel obliged to cram for it first. "Just tell me where to show up and I'll wing it."

Lord knows I don't reread my old books before hitting a convention!

 

[Christopher]

Right. Actors are under no obligation to study for interviews as if they were tests. They don't need to get all the facts right, because there are already plenty of obsessive, nitpicky fans like us to handle that.

Besides, I'd think the purpose of an interview is to learn how the subject thinks or feels about the topic, and inaccuracy or gaps in their memories are part of that. It shows how their perceptions of a past event have evolved over time. If you want to find out the objective facts about "City on the Edge," you read one of the many reference books or other sources of documentation about it. Talking to Joan Collins is what you do if you want to find out how Joan Collins remembers the experience. And if she only remembers it hazily and isn't invested enough in a decades-old temp job to brush up on the fact, that in itself is informative about how she perceives it and feels about it. It tells you that it doesn't loom nearly as large in her own career experience as it does in the minds of Trekkies. For us it was an episode we've revisited over and over again, but for her it was just a few quick working days during a time where she was jumping from one guest spot to another to another. She probably wouldn't remember her stints on The Man from U.N.C.L.E. or The Virginian or Batman any more clearly. To us, Star Trek is the show, but to her it was just a show. Everything's relative.

 

[Greg Cox]

To us, Star Trek is the show, but to her it was just a show. Everything's relative.

No doubt she would have paid more attention to that one random guest-spot if she had known that people were still going to be asking her about it forty-five years later!

It's like Fay Wray. King Kong was just a few weeks of her life, and one of umpteen movies she made back then. How was she supposed to know that this was the only movie anyone was going to care about sixty years later when she writing her memoirs . . . .