I know there were many attempts at a revival of TOS in some form during the mid 1970s, but I am curious if there was any talk (whether serious or just tossed about) of doing a TOS movie anytime between 1964 and 1969?
Was a TOS movie ever discussed (or considered) in the 60s?
- Thread starter Commander Kielbasa
- Start date
From Memory Alpha:
The notion of a Star Trek movie was originally considered amid the making of TOS Season 2, while DeForest Kelley, Gene Roddenberry and Gregg Peters were having lunch together. "The three of us came up with the idea of doing a motion picture version of the show during the hiatus," remembered Kelley, "That far back, we thought, what a terrific thing that would be. Had we done it, God knows what might have been the result of it. It was much later that 2001 and Star Wars came along. We were all ahead of our time in the thinking, even then [....] We kicked the idea about off and on and then it was kicked out the window; 'Who would ever think of making a motion picture out of a television show?'" Despite that being the verdict which the creative staff reached at the time, the idea of making a Star Trek motion picture persisted for years to come. (Cinefantastique, Vol. 9, No. 2, p. 43)
The notion of a Star Trek movie was originally considered amid the making of TOS Season 2, while DeForest Kelley, Gene Roddenberry and Gregg Peters were having lunch together. "The three of us came up with the idea of doing a motion picture version of the show during the hiatus," remembered Kelley, "That far back, we thought, what a terrific thing that would be. Had we done it, God knows what might have been the result of it. It was much later that 2001 and Star Wars came along. We were all ahead of our time in the thinking, even then [....] We kicked the idea about off and on and then it was kicked out the window; 'Who would ever think of making a motion picture out of a television show?'" Despite that being the verdict which the creative staff reached at the time, the idea of making a Star Trek motion picture persisted for years to come. (Cinefantastique, Vol. 9, No. 2, p. 43)
I'm not the expert on this, but I think they were having enough difficulty producing the television show on time and on budget without the headaches of making a major motion picture. Interesting idea, though.
The Man From UNCLE released several big screen movies abroad. They were cut together from existing episodes, with bits of new footage added here and there to spice them up.
Obviously Batman shot an actual movie that we all know about, which is pretty remarkable. It proves that Star Trek could have done the same thing if the studio had been willing.
Obviously Batman shot an actual movie that we all know about, which is pretty remarkable. It proves that Star Trek could have done the same thing if the studio had been willing.
Didn't Roddenberry announce at a sci-fi convention in 1969 that he planned to do a prequel movie showing how the crew met?
Of course, that depends on budget. For example, The Munsters movie--Munsters Go Home--had the advantage of the sets and locations (largely Universal backlot and an off site racetrack location) already available on the TV series. Moving to color was the biggest expense, but it was a budget friendly production.
Star Trek is a different animal, as there would have been a demand to "go big" with every end of the FX and locations, which could have been a budget buster considering that most ST stories involve alien worlds, etc.
the only concrete plan I know of was the fact they shot extra footage when they did the original pilot - "The Cage" - so that if the show didn't sell, they could cut more stuff in and release it as a feature film to theaters (and given the level of science fiction films of the era pre "2001: A Space Odyssey" as this would have been released in 1965 - they probably would have at least made production costs back.)
James Blish apparently told James Ashe that a Trek movie might be in the works in early to mid-1967; Ashe wrote Roddenberry on May 4, 1967 asking him to confirm or deny the rumor.
And @Maurice is right -- "The Menagerie" (the final name of the first pilot; "The Cage" was a working title that was changed) did not have enough footage for a theatrical release. That's why Roddenberry inquired with Hunter about shooting some extra scenes after it was finished.
And @Maurice is right -- "The Menagerie" (the final name of the first pilot; "The Cage" was a working title that was changed) did not have enough footage for a theatrical release. That's why Roddenberry inquired with Hunter about shooting some extra scenes after it was finished.
Just from seeing interviews and memos from various TOS production members, Lucy had a tight reign on the penny pinching budget department at Desilu. Then when Bluhdorn took over, the TOS budget seemed to get progressively smaller.
If only a film had been made and released depicting the final mission/end of the five year mission in '69, after the series ended. Batman had a major feature film, after all.
It is odd to think that the '60s is the only decade since the Star Trek franchise began not to have had a Trek feature film.
It is odd to think that the '60s is the only decade since the Star Trek franchise began not to have had a Trek feature film.
I think Paramount Pictures realized that they may have made a major mistake in cancelling TOS, even though the series ratings and revenues were low. Boy, has the studio recouped any loses they incurred in the 1960's with the present ST movie franchise. Million$ and million$.
- The Batman movie was originally intended to come out before the series, until ABC moved the show up to a mid-season replacement. The movie was shot after the 1st (half) season and largely used to introduce the property into foreign markets.
- Paramount didn't cancel the show. NBC cancelled the show.
Yes I know that, but both Solow and Justman stated that Paramount basically gave TOS the word during the 3rd season, "You're ratings are low, your revenue is low, your costs are high so our interest in your series is low." Technically, the studio was "cancelling" TOS before the network gave it the ax.
Was there any actual content of the proposed scenes in these memos, or was Roddenberry just trying to get the ball rolling at the prospect?
This was brought up in a previous Trekbbs thread on a possible 1968 Star Trek movie. Here's what I said about it in that thread:
And here's the quote from The Art of Star Trek:
And here's the quote from The Art of Star Trek:
I'm sure Doohan states on the UK 3 episode per tape, that the crash of the Columbia and a scene with Pike and injured crewman post-Rigel away mission, were some examples
"Technically" means "exactly", but what you argue is "effectively". Anyway, studios rarely kill shows of their own volition. Selling a new show is very difficult (most pilots fail, and most shows then didn't make more than one season) , so, as long as it's not losing money for the studio and the network picks it up, they keep making it. The studio usually just whacks the budget to compensate (as Paramount did). Sometimes the network reduces the licensing fee, which then makes the show lose money, and the studio will pull the plug, but that (lowered fees from the network) wasn't the case for Star Trek.
Last edited:
In fact, NBC paid more per episode for the third season than in previous years. Their license fee escalated each season, per contract.
Similar threads
