TMP an attempt to revise Star Trek back to 'The Cage' style?

[Christopher]

She was assigned the job for writing the pilot from the pool of writers Gene had on staff at the time, but didn't create the series' premise.

As has already been mentioned a couple of times in this thread, and spelled out in the WGA guidelines I linked to earlier, writing a series pilot script makes one eligible for creator credit. That's probably the most common approach -- usually (and in the case of every Trek series except TAS, TNG, and DSC), the creator credits and the pilot writing credits are one and the same. (In the case of DSC, the creator credits match the story credits on the pilot but not the teleplay credits.)

 

[Lance]

So if Phase II had actually made it to screen, Harold Livingston would've been entitled to seek co-creator status?

 

[Maurice]

But D.C. Fontana did write the majority of TNG's pilot -- heck, she originally wrote all of it, then Roddenberry tacked on his Q subplot when it was expanded from 90 minutes to 2 hours -- yet she was also denied creator credit. How do you explain that?

I did explain it to the best of my ability given what I know. I cited the Roseanne example with caveats. I then cited the Bonanza TNG example where the teleplay for the the pilot was written by someone other than the original creator, and I even admitted that it might not be a 1:1 match because I don't know all the particulars. I then rhetorically wondered if anyone in a Gerrold/Fontana situation ever got Created by credit in like circumstances, and even went so far as to qualify all that with, "My guess, based on everything I know about the WGA", clearly framing it as a "guess".

And your response? "How do you explain...?" What the @#$& did you think my entire post was about?

Honestly...

 

[Christopher]

I did explain it to the best of my ability given what I know. I cited the Roseanne example with caveats.

But that's exactly my point. Your Roseanne example said she didn't get creator credit despite contributing materially to the writing of the pilot -- which means you're saying that, normally, writing the pilot should warrant creator credit. And Fontana did write the TNG pilot. So by your own logic, Fontana would've been expected to get creator credit, even if Gerrold wouldn't have been. Therefore, it's contradictory that you seem to be using that example to argue that she didn't deserve creator credit.

 

[Valenti]

Didn't Everybody Loves Raymond and/or Seinfeld say something like inspired by the work of those guys?

 

[mos6507]

There's a logical leap in that paragraph I don't follow at all. How do you get from "something serious" to "The Cage"? It's not as if that was the only serious episode in the series.

Very few TOS episodes other than The Cage have that grim police-procedural tone to it. People show up, do their job, and go home. No time for jokes. No time for hobbies. Just the facts, mam. That is what I mean by "The Cage" and it's the main criteria used to bash TMP, that the characters were not acting true to their nature, that they were secondary to the thought-piece at the center of the plot. This also carried through in Picard's stiff uptight demeanor early in TMP.

 

[XCV330]

Very few TOS episodes other than The Cage have that grim police-procedural tone to it. People show up, do their job, and go home. No time for jokes. No time for hobbies. Just the facts, mam. That is what I mean by "The Cage" and it's the main criteria used to bash TMP, that the characters were not acting true to their nature, that they were secondary to the thought-piece at the center of the plot. This also carried through in Picard's stiff uptight demeanor early in TMP.

I haven't heard that as the main complaint about TMP. Generally from my own experience and what others have said, it has ponderous pacing. It just takes too damn long with too many of its scenes. Flying around the Enterprise in the shuttle, slowly moving through V'ger. Spending WAY too much time showing the Vulcan ship docking. There's a reason it's called The Motionless Picture. A recycled plot didn't help, but it didn't really hurt. There was a great movie inside of TMP. It wanted to come out.

The acting was fine, I think, from everyone.
Some editing would have made a far more appealing movie at the theaters.

 

[Christopher]

Very few TOS episodes other than The Cage have that grim police-procedural tone to it. People show up, do their job, and go home. No time for jokes. No time for hobbies. Just the facts, mam. That is what I mean by "The Cage" and it's the main criteria used to bash TMP, that the characters were not acting true to their nature, that they were secondary to the thought-piece at the center of the plot. This also carried through in Picard's stiff uptight demeanor early in TMP.

That's really reaching. A perception of a similar level of seriousness is hardly adequate to prove anything.

 

[Mudd]

Well, @Maurice knows a great deal about that business, the guilds and contracts. He also knows how to do research.

So, in this instance I'm certainly inclined to credit his greater understanding and therefore his explanation of the situation.

 

[Harvey]

Besides, why would [Gerrold] have been "unlikely to get" credit? He did do the bulk of the writing on the series bible. That's a known fact, and by WGA rules, that made him eligible for co-creator credit (though you're right that it didn't guarantee it as I implied before).

The WGA Guidelines you link to here and keep referring to are from the year 2000; not 1987-88 when the controversy over the "created by" credit was taking place. But, assuming the guidelines at that time were largely similar to the current guidelines, looking at the three ways a person could become eligible for a "created by" credit, things don't look great for Gerrold.

1. Receives the "Story by" or "Written by" credit on the pilot of the spin-off series (this is true even if that pilot is produced and exhibited as part of the original series)

Strictly speaking, there was no pilot, since the program received a straight-to-series order. No dice for Gerrold here.

2. Receives the "Story by" or "Written by" credit on the first episode written for the spin-off series in the event there is no pilot

In the final credits, D.C. Fontana and Gene Roddenberry shared the "written by" credit; Gerrold did not receive any writing credit. Again, no dice for Gerrold here, either.

3. Writes a format leading up to that pilot or first episode.

This is where the entirety of Gerrold's claim lies. But, as @Maurice pointed out earlier, the bible was "basically Star Trek with different characters and some tweaked assignments."

On top of that, even Joel Engel's Roddenberry biography, which clearly sides against Roddenberry in this dispute, notes that Roddenberry wrote a preliminary 8-page bible for the series (p.226). Gerrold then spent eight weeks fleshing out the bible, but Roddenberry still contributed "with comments scribbled in pencil" in addition to verbal contributions delivered in various meetings (p.229). In other words, not only did Roddenberry write the original format for Star Trek, but he initiated the format for the spin-off, and continued to make at least minor contributions to it after Gerrold took over.

 

[Maurice]

As someone who's had to do a fair amount of contract review what always struck me about the WGA MBA as regards spin-offs is what's missing: its description of such things does not actually describe the STTNG example, which does not fall under either a "planted spin-off" (Frasier) or a "generic spin-off" (a la Assignment: Earth), since both describe shows with characters spun-off of or introduced in the parent show. STTNG was a 3rd animal not quite covered.

Just for shits and giggles, consider this:

LOST IN SPACE (2018)

Written by
Matt Sazama & Burk Sharpless

Based on 'Lost in Space - No Place to Hide'
Teleplay by Irwin Allen and Shimon Wincelberg

Story by
Irwin Allen

Created by
Irwin Allen

Developed by
Matt Sazama, Burk Sharpless
​

That's an example of a remake and appears to have been treated as a "planted spin-off" because it features the same characters.

 

[Mudd]

The WGA ruled against Gerrold and Fontana on the creator credit, BTW, while finding in their favor on other issues; Roddenberry was neither persuasive nor powerful enough to "convince them" of something had it been as clearly at variance with their rules and contract as Christopher suggests (Fontana was a serving member of the WGA board during parts of the TNG era).

These things generally involve the review of a lot of documents.

 

[mos6507]

That's really reaching. A perception of a similar level of seriousness is hardly adequate to prove anything.

OK, man, you win. No connection at all.

Sheesh, it's subjective. Not everything can be adjudicated to the level of a math proof.

 

[mos6507]

I haven't heard that as the main complaint about TMP.

I have, even from the actors themselves.

There wasn’t enough drama. It just wasn’t a Star Trek movie. We had the Star Trek people, but it didn’t use us as Star Trek characters very well.​

Kirk and Spock were both, in their own way, directed to act in an unsympathetic way. Kirk undercuts Decker and just nastily barks orders to everyone. Spock is colder than he ever was in TOS. Yes, that was integral to the theme that led to Spock's epiphany in Sickbay, but it was NOT the kind of reunion fans wanted to see, and it's still kind of a tough pill to swallow.

(Actually, the audience subversion of character portrayals kind of reminds me of The Last Jedi, ya know, Luke throwing the lightsaber over his shoulder, etc... I just don't think TMP intentionally screwed with expectations. I think the filmmakers were unaware and/or unconcerned at the time of what those expectations were.)

I know he petitioned Paramount to not recast, but I just don't get the sense Gene was sentimental about the characters in the sense of the nuances of their portrayals and how they best interacted. He saw them primarily as a vessel in which to deliver the big-idea message. And this, IMHO, relates to how he approached The Cage. Storytelling was mostly about conveying an idea, not following character arcs.

Of course, I'm sure some will continue to find reason to disagree. But I've pretty much said my piece and I'll just repeat myself at this point.

 

[Maurice]

OK, man, you win. No connection at all.

That's mostly how he wins. People just throw their hands up in frustration. Me, I just stop replying to gainsaying and put my arguments out there and leave it to everyone to judge if I'm right or wrong.

 

[Pauln6]

I have, even from the actors themselves.

There wasn’t enough drama. It just wasn’t a Star Trek movie. We had the Star Trek people, but it didn’t use us as Star Trek characters very well.​

Kirk and Spock were both, in their own way, directed to act in an unsympathetic way. Kirk undercuts Decker and just nastily barks orders to everyone. Spock is colder than he ever was in TOS. Yes, that was integral to the theme that led to Spock's epiphany in Sickbay, but it was NOT the kind of reunion fans wanted to see, and it's still kind of a tough pill to swallow.

(Actually, the audience subversion of character portrayals kind of reminds me of The Last Jedi, ya know, Luke throwing the lightsaber over his shoulder, etc... I just don't think TMP intentionally screwed with expectations. I think the filmmakers were unaware and/or unconcerned at the time of what those expectations were.)

I know he petitioned Paramount to not recast, but I just don't get the sense Gene was sentimental about the characters in the sense of the nuances of their portrayals and how they best interacted. He saw them primarily as a vessel in which to deliver the big-idea message. And this, IMHO, relates to how he approached The Cage. Storytelling was mostly about conveying an idea, not following character arcs.

Of course, I'm sure some will continue to find reason to disagree. But I've pretty much said my piece and I'll just repeat myself at this point.

I think there was a lack of 'social' interaction. I don't think it was an ensemble movie but discussions between all the cast would have made it easier to recapture the TOS feel given where Kirk and Spock were for the sake of the plot. Kirk's early interaction with Scotty and McCoy have a nice feel.

Sulu often had a humorous one liner at times of stress. Rand got some zingers in too. Obviously she can't be too flippant in the McCoy scene given what came before but letting her out of the booth to welcome him adds just a hint of greater camaraderie.

How many lines do Scotty, Sulu, Chekov, Uhura, Chapel, and Rand have with each other? A scene from In Thy Image with Sulu, Chekov, and Uhura on the Rec Deck, a line from Chapel about Kirk reporting back EVERYTHING the probe gets up to, or maybe a brief senior officer briefing could have emphasised the TOS feel.

 

[Harvey]

The WGA ruled against Gerrold and Fontana on the creator credit, BTW, while finding in their favor on other issues; Roddenberry was neither persuasive nor powerful enough to "convince them" of something had it been as clearly at variance with their rules and contract as Christopher suggests (Fontana was a serving member of the WGA board during parts of the TNG era).

These things generally involve the review of a lot of documents.

Engel’s biography indicates that both claims were settled by a cash payment before arbitration was complete, so the WGA never had a chance to issue any rulings in either case. Is that not correct? (Engel’s book is slanted and includes other errors, so it is entirely possible).

 

[David cgc]

I just don't think TMP intentionally screwed with expectations. I think the filmmakers were unaware and/or unconcerned at the time of what those expectations were.

I'm not sure I agree. Given elements like the wormhole scene, where it uses the ship's mechanical problems as a metaphor for the idea that the crew can't function until Spock, the missing piece, returns, and Kirk's issues with wanting to get back into the saddle after being promoted to a desk job (an arc so nice, they used it thrice), I think there was a large element of "second origin story" intended, with the characters having to re-learn how to be the heroes of the TV show. I'm not sure how that was intended to play out, if there were anticipating sequels, or if it was another left-over element from its development as a pilot (probably not entirely, since Spock wasn't in the mix until it became a film), but it's definitely there. The movie still would've benefited from more flavor in the characterization (even my love of "The Adventures of Starship Sensible" can't carry it entirely), but it's less frustrating in that respect than, say, "Serenity," which dispensed with most of the character development over the course of Firefly and reset relationships to where they were in the pilot, especially in Mal's case, so it had someplace to build to.

 

[Maurice]

Engel’s biography indicates that both claims were settled by a cash payment before arbitration was complete, so the WGA never had a chance to issue any rulings in either case. Is that not correct? (Engel’s book is slanted and includes other errors, so it is entirely possible).

Pretty sure that's right. Had it gone through full arbitration the results would likely be public. That Fontana and Gerrold were apparently not allowed to discuss the terms of the settlement suggests thst the process was stopped for said settlement. Someone correct me if I'm incorrect on any of this.

 

[mos6507]

I think there was a large element of "second origin story" intended, with the characters having to re-learn how to be the heroes of the TV show.

I have no problem with TMP as it fits into the rest of the TOS films as a finished piece of canon. Spock's experience helps explain his softening demeanor in subsequent outings (especially his outright declaration of friendship during his death scene which seems to mirror the hand-holding epiphany scene in sickbay).

However, for a fresh audience straight out of TMP, not knowing what (if anything) would come afterwards, it was a letdown.

I always felt it was a mistake not to use the TOS cast again for a series. Maybe Phase II was too soon, as technology hadn't arrived yet, but somewhere around 1980-83 would have been ideal.

Being a Trek fan back then meant the films carried enormous expectations to tick every box that TOS did over the course of 79 episodes. That was just going to be impossible.