Was it a blessing in disguise that the original Star Trek ended after three seasons? - Star Trek (1966) Discussion

[–] AlfredTheGreat (471) 7 years ago

Yep, the quality started to slip half way through season 2 when Desilu was sold to Paramount. Star Trek did not fit the mold of Gunsmoke or Bonanza where it was reasonable to fill a 30 episode season with decent if not good episodes. Star Trek really should have only had an 18-20 episode season to insure quality. "The Alternative Factor" could have been kicked down the road to the point where it could have been made into a coherent episode.

reply

[–] Otter (24464) 7 years ago

It's true that the 3rd season largely sucked, but I've also heard that everyone knew the show was going to be cancelled so not much effort was put into the later episodes. So it's possible that if the show had a future, they would gave made more of an effort to find decent scripts.

As long as they kept "Spock's Brian", which is a treasure - perhaps the finest piece of unintentional camp in science fiction!

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

It was a blessing, on multiple levels. If the show had been lasted many years, a lot of the cast would probably not have been willing to do any "reunion" movies (which probably would have been made for TV instead of being the theatrical releases we know). I could imagine Shatner or Nimoy telling interviewers why they didn't star in some 1983 NBC TV movie because "7 years on TV was enough" or because they did everything they wanted with the character and there was nothing new.

Additionally, I don't think it would have been as well liked in syndication because there would be a glut of terrible episodes. It wouldn't be looked on as fondly. A lot of people became Star Trek fans in the '70s because they stumbled upon a syndicated rerun of one of the truly great episodes. With a lot more terrible episodes, the odds of landing on a good episode would have dropped significantly.

I also believe that Star Trek the Next Generation would never have taken off if the original series had lasted a long time.

reply

[–] KobyashiMaru (62) 7 years ago

There HAD to be a third season. Star Trek couldn't have gone into syndication with only 2 seasons and that's where Gene Roddenberry struck gold. Star Trek was far more popular in independent syndication than it ever was on prime time network TV. The rest was history.

reply

[–] MaximRecoil (4836) 2 months ago

"There HAD to be a third season. Star Trek couldn't have gone into syndication with only 2 seasons and that's where Gene Roddenberry struck gold."

There's no set-in-stone rule about that. If going by the rule of thumb, it used to be cited as 100 episodes, or more recently, 88 episodes (e.g., 4 seasons of 22 episodes each). With only 79 episodes, Star Trek falls short of that.

The Monkees only had 2 seasons / 58 episodes, and it was widely syndicated in the following decades. I watched it in syndication when I was a kid in the 1980s. If Star Trek had ended after only 2 seasons it would have had 55 episodes.

reply

[–] brux (14840) 7 years ago

Actually, it was not the quality that slipped, as in anything there were mostly average stories, and some below average, but the thing about Star Trek was the inspiration.

Many of the best ideas were ruled out by studio execs who thought Americans were too stupid or not ready for them. There was lots of cool science fiction writers, such as Harlan Ellison who wrote for Outer Limits that had great story lines that were not used for some reason.

I think Star Trek as subversive, that is it was deliberate how Gene Roddenberry put certain ideas out in society in ways that were not threatening, and when the establishment saw how popular it was they attacked it based on ratings, kind of like how they do that with good news shows these days.

reply

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

Americans ARE stupid.

reply

[–] brux (14840) 7 years ago

May be ... but we can kick your ass into the stone age whoever you are, there's that.

reply

[–] strntz (12773) 7 years ago

Was it a blessing in disguise that the original Star Trek ended after three seasons?

If the plan was to continue to follow the Lost In Space plan of moving away from legitimate science fiction and going for silliness, then yes. Watching the crew using their "whistle finger guns" to defeat Mudd's androids was as about a cringe inducing moment I can remember on any program.

Still, many long running shows hit their stride after three seasons. Most people think the Simpson's best years were between 3 and 10, and M*A*S*H was better in the middle years in my opinion. Bonanza was pretty good up until about season 8.

reply

[–] ccr1633 (1538) 7 years ago

"If the plan was to continue to follow the Lost In Space plan of going for silliness rather than real scifi, then yes. Watching the crew using their "whistle finger guns" to defeat Mudd's androids was as about a cringe inducing moment I can remember on any program."

But that "I Mudd" episode at least had the charisma of Harcourt Fenton Mudd going for it. Most of the season 3 episodes lacked anything at all redeeming. There's only a couple I would call good or better: Spectre of the Gun (only for its eerie qualities and sense of impending doom), Day of the Dove, Tholian Web. Even the weaker episodes ending season 2 are gems by comparison. You would've thought that somewhere along the line somebody would have said, "You know guys, it's getting awfully coincidental that every planet our federation heroes visit just happens to be based on periods of earth's history. How about some real sci-fi?"

reply

[–] hyperjet (751) 7 years ago

I never cared for any of the new series or films. Would have been better if they'd taken a few month off and found some fresh writers.

reply

[–] Stratego (31059) 4 days ago

Look, I'm doing a rewatch and am still in season 1 and the show is already becoming extremely repetitive. Every other episode seems to take place on a planet that resembles 19/20th century Earth. They even re-use the same Wild West town sets. The writers and set-designers appear to have very little imagination. Those particular episodes are a bore to watch.

Of course it was a blessing, these seasons have like 30 episodes, which is more than enough.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 4 days ago

Personally, I feel ALL tv is a vast wasteland designed to sell soap.

What is interesting to me is us future people are unable to view these old shows as they felt in the past as ground breaking amazing fresh unique entertainment like it was viewed back then.

Our tastes interests and expectations have evolved a ton since the early tv days and none of the old stuff will ever live up to today's standards.

But it was also just a cheap TV show to sell soap or whatever. Sets were reused earth location sets already existed. They did what they had to do to keep budget low.

Bad as it honestly is NOW it still managed bunches of spin off shows movies and even a culture and world wide fan base. Even today.
Where as lost is space Jetsons space 1999 etc have not.

As a kid I do remember how really cool star trek was at the time. We even played out doors on various missions to planet back yard or woods. Great times because of a great show that is cemented in time now as a classic.

reply

[–] Stratego (31059) 4 days ago

"Sets were reused earth location sets already existed. They did what they had to do to keep budget low."

I get that, but it would've been better to re-use the more "alien" looking sets and mix them up a little (or just stay on board the Enterprise). You've got a show set in the future and in space, what a waste to keep on going to back to Earth-like environments. Those episodes feel more like Twilight Zone episodes about an alternate universe or something. The sci-fi aspect is what sets Star Trek apart.

I do enjoy older shows and despite some awkward elements don't try to judge them too much through a 21st century lense. I just think shorter seasons and a little more imagination would've helped.

reply

[–] 123Guy (7838) 4 days ago

i do certainly agree with using less normal earth settings, those were not my favorite episodes either :) Much preferred the weirdo pink skies, and werid generic rocks and strange plants style planets

the odds of a race rebuilding full germany on another planet? Come on!! :D

reply

[–] bozo_500 (13378) 4 days ago

Agreed at 78/79! episodes there's more than enough,

but even so the series ending when it did after only 3y (and when it was in decline) created an insatiable desire for more.

also that it bowed out before it got too bad/70s/unwatchable going even worse than s3 (therefore lessening anticipation for more)

reply

[–] Stratego (31059) 4 days ago

"created an insatiable desire for more."

That always happens, but when you look at shows that just keep milking it, you know it's something to be preferred.

Fawlty Towers, one of the best shows of all time and it only has 12 episodes .

reply

[–] bozo_500 (13378) 4 days ago

Yes one need only look at the later mutiple 'Berman Trek' series, too much, of varying quality, eventually totally killed Trek on TV and films. and there was little/no desire for more (until Paramount took a risk and went back to TOS for a big budget movie)

reply