Worldbuilding in Season 1

[Christopher]

To be clear - in 1966 using familiar star names WAS world building. “Ok I’ve heard of that” was cool and likely unique.

Why would it be unique? Obviously the stars most people have heard of are the first ones that any TV or movie writer would refer to, so I don't see why you'd imagine it was rare. Forbidden Planet was set in the Altair system, just off the top of my head. Lost in Space, of course, made constant references to Alpha Centauri. Looking at Wikipedia, I find references to a 1920 silent film called Algol; Robinson Crusoe on Mars featuring aliens from Alnilam; Moon Pilot (1962) featuring an alien from Beta Lyrae; Barbarella crash-landing on a planet of Tau Ceti; The Time Tunnel featuring alien villains from Canopus; etc. And in comics, you've got Adam Strange going to a planet around Alpha Centauri, Hawkman coming from a planet around Polaris, etc. This was commonplace in mass media, and of course even more so in prose.

Star Trek was innovative for '60s TV in some ways, but this is not one of them.

Hence Jupiter 2. What does Jupiter have to do with interstellar travel?

What did Mercury have to do with putting a man in orbit of Earth? What did Apollo, a sun god, have to do with going to the Moon? These names aren't always literal.

 

[Search4]

Why would it be unique? Obviously the stars most people have heard of are the first ones that any TV or movie writer would refer to, so I don't see why you'd imagine it was rare. Forbidden Planet was set in the Altair system, just off the top of my head. Lost in Space, of course, made constant references to Alpha Centauri. Looking at Wikipedia, I find references to a 1920 silent film called Algol; Robinson Crusoe on Mars featuring aliens from Alnilam; Moon Pilot (1962) featuring an alien from Beta Lyrae; Barbarella crash-landing on a planet of Tau Ceti; The Time Tunnel featuring alien villains from Canopus; etc. And in comics, you've got Adam Strange going to a planet around Alpha Centauri, Hawkman coming from a planet around Polaris, etc. This was commonplace in mass media, and of course even more so in prose.

Always fun to poke at you, Christopher. I do disagree a bit. I do think it was "rare" because media properties in SF were rare.

I think we agree using a name people would remember seems perfectly reasonable. It is the Andromeda Galaxy not M-31.

But "rare"... Forbidden Planet was released in 1956 - well before Trek of course. While clearly an inspriration, it was a one off. I suspect few remember Altair was "the star" years afterwards in a non-video non-rerun world (Robby the robot yes - Altair not so much).

But Trek was a weekly series - NOT a one-off movie - seen by many when there were only three TV channels and than for many years in reruns. So i would argue all of the uses you show were "rare" until there were weekly sci-fi space operas... which at the time were largely Trek (for example, Orion) and Lost in Space (=Alpha Centauri, which i think it the only star mentioned by name). And some of your choices are post-Trek.

PS I salute you on Alnilam as i'm an amateur astronomer and didn't recognize the name!

 

[Christopher]

I do disagree a bit. I do think it was "rare" because media properties in SF were rare.

Not that rare. And that seems like shifting the goalposts, since our discussion about the use of star names in fiction was specifically about science fiction properties, not media properties in general. Obviously most of the works that use star names are going to be about outer space.

I think we agree using a name people would remember seems perfectly reasonable. It is the Andromeda Galaxy not M-31.

By itself, yes, obviously. But that's taking the issue out of context. The point of the discussion is about how you choose which stars in your fiction are inhabited. A lot of fiction defaults to using familiar star names for that purpose, but the most familiar stars are usually the biggest and brightest ones, which are the shortest-lived ones and therefore unlikely to last long enough to evolve life. So the irony is that the stars most favored for hosting life in fiction are usually the ones least likely to do so in reality.

But "rare"... Forbidden Planet was released in 1956 - well before Trek of course. While clearly an inspriration, it was a one off. I suspect few remember Altair was "the star" years afterwards in a non-video non-rerun world (Robby the robot yes - Altair not so much).

This is incorrect. You're making the common mistake of assuming that just because we do something with modern technology today, it means people in the past couldn't do it at all. It just means they did it in different ways that the newer method has rendered obsolete. Old movies were often re-released in local theaters. There were ways that films could be rented or purchased for school or private showings, actual reels of film rather than videotapes. I believe it was possible to borrow some movies from libraries as well. Syndicated TV broadcasts of old feature films began in the mid-1950s. And of course most movies had novelizations that you could buy. Forbidden Planet's novelization was released shortly before the film came out, written by Philip MacDonald under the pseudonym W.J. Stuart, and had new editions published in 1967, 1978, and 1990.

 

[Greg Cox]

I can vouch for the fact that, growing up in the sixties, FORBIDDEN PLANET used to show up regularly on TV, playing on weekend afternoons alongside old Tarzan movies, Abbott & Costello movies, and other vintage sci-fi movies like THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD STILL or THE AMAZING COLOSSAL MAN, all of which I watched as a wide-eyed kid.

Unlike today, you couldn't watch them whenever you felt like it, but they could and were watched on weekends, after school, and on the late show. I used to study each week's TV GUIDE religiously to see which cool old movies were airing on "Sci-Fi Theater" on Sunday afternoon, or on the "4:00 Movie" every weekday after school.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Even in the 70's into the 80's I regularly saw Forbidden Planet, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1961 film), Fantastic Voyage, not to mention the Planet of the Apes films on the various local stations and network affiliates. By the time they wound up on VHS, I was already extremely familiar with them.

@Greg Cox I still watch Tarzan movies on Sunday mornings when I can.

 

[scotpens]

. . .Robinson Crusoe on Mars featuring aliens from Alnilam. . .

What's the source for that? I don't recall the aliens' homeworld or home star system being mentioned in the movie.

 

[Kor]

What's the source for that? I don't recall the aliens' homeworld or home star system being mentioned in the movie.

There's that part where Draper is talking to the alien Friday: "We call that group of stars Orion. ... You come from the center star in the belt of Orion. We call that Alnilam, which I'm sure is very interesting to you."

Kor

 

[Christopher]

What's the source for that?

Follow the link I provided in that post to Wikipedia's page on real stars in fiction.

 

[Kor]

Plus that line of dialog I quoted.

Kor

 

[scotpens]

There's that part where Draper is talking to the alien Friday: "We call that group of stars Orion. ... You come from the center star in the belt of Orion. We call that Alnilam, which I'm sure is very interesting to you."

Thank you, you've jogged my memory. I stand corrected.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Even in the 70's into the 80's I regularly saw Forbidden Planet, Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1961 film), Fantastic Voyage, not to mention the Planet of the Apes films on the various local stations and network affiliates. By the time they wound up on VHS, I was already extremely familiar with them.

True. In California, they were staples, and not just as content for horror/sci-fi hosts. Obviously, the Planet of the Apes films often ran as "Apes week" in the early 80s on KABC (Ch. 7) late night, and eventually moving to KTLA (Ch.5), while Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Fantastic Voyage and other "big" sci-fi films such as Pal's The Time Machine were part of some sort of "sci-fi" week programming, usually during the summer. They were broadcast enough for the interested viewer to be very familiar with the names of actors, directors, etc.

 

[drt]

Oddly enough, while I probably managed to catch most big name (and a whole bunch of the small) scifi movies as a kid, Forbidden Planet always eluded me - although, I totally knew who Robby the Robot was from his many guest appearances elsewhere.

I also remember that 2001 would get an annual airing on network TV.

 

[Christopher]

I also remember that 2001 would get an annual airing on network TV.

Really? It was a long time before I got to see it. I consider myself fortunate that I'd already read the novel numerous times before seeing the movie, since it was the only way I could tell what the hell was going on in the movie.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

I also remember that 2001 would get an annual airing on network TV.

In the U.S.? I recall only one network airing that I personally was aware of and saw, and that was on NBC. I wonder what year it was. And I'm not sure of my facts, at all.

 

[drt]

Really? It was a long time before I got to see it. I consider myself fortunate that I'd already read the novel numerous times before seeing the movie, since it was the only way I could tell what the hell was going on in the movie.

I don’t think I read the novel until around fifth or sixth grade, but remember being able to to follow along ok until Bowman goes into the monolith, then everything afterwards was like “Wha happen?”

With regard to the timing, I thought I recall it being aired a couple times in the mid-70s, I presumed it was more or less annually, like they used to do with Wizard of Oz and Gone with the Wind, but maybe I’ve hallucinated the one occasion on NBC @ZapBrannigan remembers into multiple events. I do remember I ate a bunch of Tootsie Rolls that came in a cardboard tube bank that looked like a big Tootsie Roll when I watched it one time, lol.

 

[T'Bonz]

Really? It was a long time before I got to see it. I consider myself fortunate that I'd already read the novel numerous times before seeing the movie, since it was the only way I could tell what the hell was going on in the movie.

Same here. I was very grateful to have read the novel (once in my case) before seeing the movie. Or else I've have been lost.

 

[Commishsleer]

Same here. I was very grateful to have read the novel (once in my case) before seeing the movie. Or else I've have been lost.

I still don't understand it.
I mean the basic outline yes.
But the blah blah at the end
i mean a great movie. It was a brilliant movie style-wise. I went and saw it at the cinema for the anniversary and its still awe inspiring.

Also don't know what's going on with Donnie Darko. LOL. I'm not all that smart

 

[Christopher]

Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick were such an odd combination for 2001. A writer who liked to explain everything and a filmmaker who preferred to explain nothing. The two versions are completely different experiences.

I remember people objecting to the film 2010 explaining the reasons for HAL's breakdown, insisting that it had been meant to be mysterious and it was wrong to give it an unambiguous explanation -- unaware that it was the same explanation Clarke had given in the original 2001 novel back in 1968 (and of course in the 2010 novel that the film was adapted from).

 

[Neopeius]

Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick were such an odd combination for 2001. A writer who liked to explain everything and a filmmaker who preferred to explain nothing. The two versions are completely different experiences.

I remember people objecting to the film 2010 explaining the reasons for HAL's breakdown, insisting that it had been meant to be mysterious and it was wrong to give it an unambiguous explanation -- unaware that it was the same explanation Clarke had given in the original 2001 novel back in 1968 (and of course in the 2010 novel that the film was adapted from).

I'll go out on a limb -- I like 2010 more then 2001. It's a great movie.

 

[Christopher]

I'll go out on a limb -- I like 2010 more then 2001. It's a great movie.

Yeah, it's more my speed too. I find 2001 (the movie) rather tedious, and I've never been a fan of Kubrick's use of stock-music scores rather than original ones.

Although the film version of 2010 was badly dated in retrospect by playing up the Cold War tension angle, what with the Soviet Union ceasing to exist just 5-6 years after the film came out. Okay, the novel had the USSR still existing, but the East-West relations were cordial, at least among the astronauts and scientists that the novel focused on.