It seems uncharacteristic of Leonard Nimoy to care about being the series lead. He's never seemed like the prima donna type. Shatner on the other hand, as much as I like him...
It seems uncharacteristic of Leonard Nimoy to care about being the series lead. He's never seemed like the prima donna type. Shatner on the other hand, as much as I like him...
It seems uncharacteristic of Leonard Nimoy to care about being the series lead. He's never seemed like the prima donna type. Shatner on the other hand, as much as I like him...
Well, I'm not sure what the specifics of Nimoy's actions were, but I think most of the pressure to elevate Spock to stardom came from elsewhere -- from the huge, rabid following Spock had among female fans, and from the network that wanted to capitalize on it.
I think what's always mattered to Nimoy was having a substantive role to play. It's not that he wants more screen time for its own sake, but he wants the roles he gets to be meaty and worthwhile and significant to the story -- which is why he turned down a cameo in Generations. So I think he would've been pushing, not necessarily for Spock to get more lines than Kirk or whatever, but for the stories to give Spock a meaningful role that served and developed his character. And he would've been backed by the network saying "Yes, yes, give us lots and lots of Spock so our sponsors can sell more stuff to his devoted female fans." But that would've been countered by Shatner going "Hey, wasn't I supposed to be the star of the show?"
Nimoy sent a memo to the higher ups with some very specific complaints about how Spock was being handled, or rather mishandled, to the point where one would wonder why Kirk even had a science officer in the first place.
I remember seeing a recent interview with George Takei. During his initial introduction to Star Trek in the early 1960's, he was very impressed with the quality of GR's series ideas. However, George predicted that the show would only last 2 seasons because television networks are not interested in quality shows, only in high ratings and huge profits.
Nevermind that by that time Nielsen had been around long enough that the Networks knew how to manipulate things to help keep shows they wanted...and help kill shows they didn't.
Nimoy sent a memo to the higher ups with some very specific complaints about how Spock was being handled, or rather mishandled, to the point where one would wonder why Kirk even had a science officer in the first place.
I can't recall who made the comment, but one particular ST critic complained that ever since Spock had his brain removed in "Spock's Brain", he was never the same logical Vulcan after that. After seeing his occasional emotional and irrational behavior in some 3rd season episodes...I have to agree!
![]()
^Justman contributed more creatively than the credits would indicate. For instance, he submitted the original proposal for what became "Tomorrow is Yesterday," but was never given credit for it.
For what it's worth, Freiberger never had a writing credit on Star Trek either (although he had numerous writing credits elsewhere).
The interesting thing is that "Lee Cronin" was a pseudonym for Gene L. Coon so in production order Coon wrote "Spectre of the Gun", "Spock's Brain", "Wink of an Eye", and "Let That Be Your Last Battlefield"![]()
For instance, he wrote "Spock's Brain" as an intentional comedy, but they ended up playing it straight.
Fred Freiberger may not have been the best thing to happen to Star Trek, but he also didn't deserve the vitriol some fans direct towards him.
That's been disproven, as has been discussed a number of times on this board. I think the demographics story is just another Roddenberry tall tale. Below is the relevant quotation from the Star Trek piece on the Television Obscurities site (click to open page), complete with linked references....If they'd started keeping track of demographics a couple of years sooner, they would've seen that ST had very strong ratings in their most desired demographic, which might've convinced advertisers to continue sponsoring the show and let it stay on the air longer.
What About Demographics?
For decades, it has been suggested that NBC cancelled Star Trek shortly before the television networks began using demographic breakdowns when determining the relative success or failure of television programs. If demographics had been taken into consideration, some believe, Star Trek would never have been dropped. However, demographics were a part of the decision making process during the mid-1960s.
In February of 1967, as Star Trek was winding down its first season, CBS made the shocking decision to cancel its long-running western Gunsmoke, despite the fact that the series had a 21.7/35 Nielsen rating [44]. CBS was disappointed that twice as many viewers over the age of 50 were watching Gunsmoke compared to viewers in the 18-to-34 demographic. CBS eventually reversed its decision, but the precedent had been set. At the time, an NBC spokesman noted that the network was focusing on general rating trends when canceling programs [45].
A year later, however, Broadcasting reported that NBC’s upcoming 1968-1969 schedule “represents the fruition of a five-year process in building shows with youth appeal [46]. The schedule “would emphasize an attraction to the young influentials,” or the “articulate, upper-income families from the more heavily populated areas of the country” [47]. At the same time, officials noted that the network wasn’t forgetting other age groups: “Our programming is aimed for balance, diversity, with strong leaders, such as Bonanza and the Dean Martin Show, which appeal to all age groups” [48].
Star Trek was renewed for the 1968-1969 season — perhaps due in part to a letter writing campaign — but saw a drop in its per minute commercial price, from $39,000 to $36,000 [49]. At the end of the 1968-1969 season, Star Trek‘s last, NBC trumpeted its ratings success in a variety of categories, including the 18-to-49 demographic [50]. If Star Trek had been a demographic success, why would it have been cancelled?
In reality, Star Trek‘s young adult audience wasn’t any larger than the ABC and CBS programs it competed with. According to Television Magazine, the four episodes broadcast between October 27th and November 17th, 1966 averaged 8,630,000 viewers in the 18-to-49 age group, making up 43% of the show’s total audience [51]. By comparison, during the same period ABC’s Bewitched (which aired opposite Star Trek from 9:30-10PM) averaged 10,210,000 young adult viewers or 37% of the total audience.
As for CBS, My Three Sons (aired from 8:30-9PM) averaged 8,580,000 young adult viewers (the series was pre-empted on October 27th) or 36% of the program’s total audience. Thus, while Star Trek had a larger percentage of viewers in the young adult demographic, two of the programs it competed with had more viewers overall (and Bewitched had more young adult viewers as well). This was at the start of the show’s run; ratings fell every season.
^Ahh, okay. Thanks for correcting my misconception.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.