MovieChat Forums > Star Trek (1966) Discussion > Why were the stuntmen so damned OBVIOUS?

Why were the stuntmen so damned OBVIOUS?


I love TOS, but in fight scenes, why were the stuntmen given stupid, ill-fitting wigs?

Twinned with awful fight scene continuity, it's laughable.

reply

No high def TV back then, color was a novelty, safe to say most people didn't notice.

reply

"No high def TV back then"

People these days underestimate the quality of TV "back then." They either weren't around back then or they never had good reception. In reality, the quality of NTSC broadcasts on a standard resolution CRT TV was quite good, assuming perfect reception. For example:

https://i.imgur.com/xu62D7t.png

That's a picture of my cheap 12" Samsung B&W TV that was made in 1984, with an episode of The Twilight Zone playing on it. The TV only has an RF input so it's the same as it would look with an over-the-air NTSC broadcast with perfect reception.

"color was a novelty"

Color, or lack thereof, doesn't matter. The B&W portion of the signal ("luma") has drastically more resolution than the color portion ("chroma") anyway. You don't lose any details with a B&W TV; you just lose the color information.

"safe to say most people didn't notice."

The stuntmen are very noticeable, as long as you have good reception and your TV isn't in need of repair or drastically out of adjustment.

reply

Okay boomer

reply

Your non sequitur is dismissed, Slow Doug.

Also, LOL at you thinking, because of a tired meme, that there are only two generations currently alive: yours and Baby Boomers. "Baby Boomer" is my mother's generation, not mine.

reply

Because their budgets were, like, six dollars per episode.

reply

If that. Some of the engineering sets were cardboard and they would flex and crease if someone touched them.

reply

Oh, come on... The dual reasons for all the shortcomings of Star Trek in the realm of sets, props, costumes and special effects -- Come down to: Budget, but not in a ridiculous way - With a per-show budget of $193,500, Star Trek would compete with the globe-trotting I Spy for the title of Most Expensive Series on Television during the 1966-67 season.(From Marc Cushman's book on the first season) AND The way in which the show was intended to be shown - Low resolution television.
No point in mocking it for this sort of thing. It was better than most feature film SF that preceded it.

reply

Thank you.

reply

With a per-show budget of $193,500, Star Trek would compete with the globe-trotting I Spy for the title of Most Expensive Series on Television during the 1966-67 season.


That budget includes the show's fixed costs (such as -- and I'm trying to remember -- actors' pay and various studio fees, probably amortized costs of the standing set, and so on). And bear in mind that they couldn't just run over to the studio's wardrobe department and get half a dozen Klingon uniforms. Wish I could recall where I read this, but if you subtract the fixed costs from the overall budget, the remainder was pretty paltry after it was lowered for the second season and again the third (which presumably explains the third-season "sets" that consisted of floor-to-ceiling draperies).

The standing set was mostly plywood with a lot of paint. In the raw footage (before the sound was modified), actors' footsteps on the bridge sounded like thump-thump-thump.

reply

Actually, the budgets were extremely high the first two seasons. But you keep on talking out your ass.

reply

As others have said, low-res TV and budget/scheduling account for the main reasons. But there's also another.

When TOS was first made (1966), TV shows were viewed like newspapers: something to be seen once or twice, and then forgotten and replaced by whatever came along next. TOS almost single-handedly created the "cult show" genre where fans would watch the episodes hundreds of times and notice the sloppy production values that were originally glossed over to meet a deadline for airing. Everyone connected with the show would have been stunned if they knew it would still be viewed and discussed over half a century in the future.

reply

Yes, that's another very good point! And we probably have (dare I say it?) the third season to thank for that. Without it, there wouldn't have been enough episodes for "stripping" the show five nights a week, which is how syndication generally worked back then.

And syndication is where Star Trek really became a phenomenon.

reply


...why were the stuntmen given stupid, ill-fitting wigs?


You sure you're not thinking of Shatner?



reply

If anyone had a effed-up wig, it was Chekov. I bet anything he was even jealous of the better wigs the stuntmen had.

reply

LOL

reply

Shatner did not come up through the ranks as an action actor unlike someone like Robert Conrad or Lee Majors. So he had to be pulled out of certain shots for fear of injury that might shut down production. The show just made the best of Shatner's abilities and moved forward. For those saying HD TV made it worse it did but the shots of Kirk fighting Ben Finney or Khan in engineering were very obvious back in syndication during the 1970's.

reply

Watching old The Wild Wild West episodes it is impressive all the stunts Robert Conrad did himself.

reply

I remember something kind of funny in one of Lee Major's scenes as Heath Barkley. They used a stunt double for a fight scene and his boots were a different color than Heath's! The part with the double goes by fast. It's hard to notice. But I did notice and replayed the scene. Back in the sixties, audiences couldn't do that. So it was no big deal.

I've also freeze framed some fight scenes on Bonanza and you can clearly see the stunt man. It was easy to notice in a scene with Hoss even with only the back of his head showing. There weren't any stunt men as BIG as Dan Blocker.

reply

Also, thank you.

reply

I'm willing to forgive it, because it led to the one genuinely hilarious moment on "DS9".

Okay, I never liked that show much, but there was a funny time-travel episode that sent the DS9 character back to the world of "The Trouble with Tribbles"... and you'll remember that Kirk's stuntman/standin Eddie Paskey was also used as a random crew member named Mr. Leslie who'd appear on the bridge or working the transporter, and who participated in the bar fight during "Tribbles"? So the DS9 characters travel in time, and are there in that bar, and they look over to Mr. Leslie's table and see Shatner's stunt double... and Dr. Bashir keeps asking "Is that Kirk? He looks like Kirk, doesn't he?"

And that may be favorite fan-service in-joke of all time!

https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Leslie

reply

That's my favorite DS9 episode as well (and if we'd known it was on the remastered original-series set, we wouldn't have bothered buying an entire season of DS9 just to get it). And I love that joke!

A minor correction: It was Paul Baxley (Lt. Freeman and Shatner's stunt double) who was mistaken for Kirk (although Eddie Paskey, AKA Lt. Leslie and Shatner's stand-in, was also in the borrowed scenes. My fuzzy recollection was confirmed by Memory Alpha (near the end of Act Three, next to the photo of three TOS Klingons): https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Trials_and_Tribble-ations_(episode)#Act_Three

reply

Nobody thought tv was going to be watched obsessively by generation after generation. They were just trying to sell laundry soap.

reply