Would-be episodes 25 & 26 of season 3

[James Cole]

I've been reading the Marc Cushman These are the Voyages guide to season 3 (I know, controversial here) through my TOS rewatch, and he mentions that NBC had the option to order either 24 or 26 episodes, and only officially canceled the order for the last two while "Turnabout Intruder" was in filming.

The 25th episode was to be "The Joy Machine", Meyer Dolinsky's rewrite of Theodore Sturgeon's original script (which was novelized in the 1990's).

The 26th would have been either John Meredyth Lucas' "The Godhead" or Darlene Hartman's held over from season 2's "Shol"... although Cushman is much more vague about this slot at the end of the book, only that Shatner would have directed.

Considering these slots should have been in pre-production (especially "The Joy Machine" needing to be ready to shoot in 6 days when the cancellation order came in), has anything else come to light about what could have been? Casting, set designs, later draft scripts? Well, aside from the old "Requiem for a Martian" meme anyway.

 

[BillJ]

I wouldn't put much stock in Cushman's books.

 

[Forbin]

I wouldn't put much stock in Cushman's books.

Oddly enough, I do - I hide my stock certificates in them.

 

[BillJ]

I wouldn't put much stock in Cushman's books.

Oddly enough, I do - I hide my stock certificates in them.

Finally, someone found a legitimate use for the books!

 

[johnnybear]

Do you really think they're that bad? I've quite enjoyed them myself although I won't forgive him for not having that photo of Uhura riding her bike in the season 2 book!
JB

 

[BeatleJWOL]

My understanding is that if you can find sources for the claims in Cushman's books...

...write them down and go buy those other books while you use the Cushman books for a doorstop or something.

 

[Harvey]

Haven't read Cushman and Osborn's season three book, but I assume they're drawing this from Star Trek Lives! (I think that's the book in question). Isn't there an on-set report there of Shatner being furious the whole time because the episode he was slated to direct wasn't being made?

I haven't seen any evidence of a 25th and 26th episode of season three at UCLA, but that doesn't mean it isn't there.

No (futher) comment about TATV.

 

[James Cole]

Flash forward ten months. After completion of the third season's initial 16 episodes order with indication from NBC there would be more, Freiberger handed Sturgeon's script off to Meyer Dolinsky, who had pleased the producer with the economic and promotion-worthy "Plato's Stepchildren." Ted Sturgeon's original concept, with its overabundance of sets, speaking parts, nonspeaking parts, and sci-fi devices, needed major scaling down. Dolinsky's 1st Draft teleplay arrived on October 21, 1968. [summary] A second draft was still needed from Dolinsky, plus script polishing from Arthur Singer, but Freiberger chose to stop further development until a time when it was known if NBC wanted a 25th and 26th episode for the season. "The Joy Machine" was earmarked as Number 25... with Shatner slated to direct.

TATV S3, pg 514 (sourced from the publicly available Amazon.com preview for the book)

then this bit from the "Turnabout Intruder" chapter:

During the first few days of production, both Freiberger and Singer were busy preparing for what might be the 25th script to film for the Third Season -- "The Joy Machine," written by Theodore Sturgeon, then rewritten by Meyer Dolinsky. That assignment, however, was vacated immediately following New Year's Day. NBC had exercised its contractual right to cut back its order from 26 to 24 episodes. [Kindle says pages 631-632?]

Later Cushman quotes Winston, with Roddenberry talking about Shatner directing "the last one."

So, yes, Cushman could have given much clarification on this one. Too bad I no longer live in Southern California... It would be intriguing to check out the UCLA collection myself.

 

[T'Girl]

I'm currently half way through a re-read of Inside Star Trek, will see if there's any mention of this.

While generally happy with the bulk of Theodore Sturgeon's writings, The Joy Machine novel (with James Gunn) was slightly below average, it reads like a short story that had been stretched into a novel.

If the episode were similar to the book, it would have just been another Kirk verses a computer story.

 

[Green Shirt]

I wouldn't put much stock in Cushman's books.

Oddly enough, I do - I hide my stock certificates in them.

Well, theft isn't an issue.

At least its a good, solid book. The certs should stay nice and crispy.


That gives me an idea. Who can come up with the best use for a Cushman book?

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread.

 

[Body of Landru]

I've never heard of these books before. Anyone care to explain what the big problem is?

 

[T'Girl]

Never read them myself, however the consensus would seem to be that they're badly researched and the writing is sloppy.

 

[Forbin]

They have some interesting information, but I found myself getting bored with the last one. The production section for each episode, for example - Just listing what shots were filmed on what day is deadly dull. Sure there's the occasional behind-the-scenes tidbit, but not a lot for most eps. And I'm more interested in details of HOW the effects were done, rather than just one sentence saying "such and such effects house did the visuals."

I'm glad I read them, but I'm not likely to REread them.

 

[Karzak]

Cushman's lack of journalistic integrity has been well-documented on this message board. His work is shoddy and the books are riddled with factual errors, lazy writing, and most apparently just in dire need of a good editor.

Anyone interested in the production of TOS would be well suited and better off, frankly, referring to Star Trek Fact Check.

 

[BeatleJWOL]

Cushman's lack of journalistic integrity has been well-documented on this message board. His work is shoddy and the books are riddled with factual errors, lazy writing, and most apparently just in dire need of a good editor.

Anyone interested in the production of TOS would be well suited and better off, frankly, referring to Star Trek Fact Check.

Yep.

Inside Star Trek and The Making Of Star Trek are also far better sources (although Inside was written about 20 years after the fact).

And of course, anything that Cushman used as a source; I imagine the bibliography is quite extensive, even if used poorly.

 

[Warped9]

The Making Of Star Trek is a great book, but it asserts some fallacies that were accepted as fact for decades.