That Wacky Redhead

[vultan]

Brainbin, I'd venture, if you're right about Takei's political mindset, that he may eventually decide to run for the California state legislature or even Congress ITTL.

Somewhat tangentially, and I don't expect you to get into detail on this given your rightful aversion to making this a politics-heavy TL , I just had the thought, while contemplating Takei's future political career, that the pre-1990's tradition of consensus and civility in Washington might actually survive to the present day (i.e., TTL 2012) here. This all goes back to the quagmire that ended early. I've sometimes thought that all the political nastiness we see OTL is actually the last act of a half-century-long struggle between the opposing sides in said quagmire. If that wrapped up early, leaving a much less divisive legacy, and if the political culture of TTL's 1970 U.S. is thereby more hospitable to consensus - something that we've already seen hints of in your account of Those Were The Days - I suspect that, among other things, the so-called "New Right" and its successors, right down to the "Tea Party", might well never develop at all, or if they do, in very different forms. The center-right of the Republican Party - the Rockefeller wing - is, if the trends you appear to be establishing continue to hold true, going to be a continuing viable entity in the TTL 2000's and 2010's. At least, that's how I look at it.
.

Bear in mind, Brainbin never said this would be a utopia. True, it's not going to be a depressing dystopia to the degree of For All Time, or even Fear, Loathing, and Gumbo on the Campaign Trail '72. Even though the author has said he has no interest in making this a political timeline, he should be commended for his realism in addressing American politics.

One thing everyone should understand is that in modern American politics, whenever the Democrats veer too far to the left, there is always right-wing backlash that the GOP takes advantage of. Look at the midterms of 1966, 1994, and 2010. Even here, Brainbin has stated that Humphrey's progressivism has caused a rise in political power of the Larry McDonald/John Rarick types in the South under the wing of Wallace's new party. Say what you want about Nixon, but at least he completed desegregation quietly, with little backlash. No such luck with Humphrey...

I'd expect the 1974 midterms to be a Renaissance for the hard-right in Anerican politics. This is Humphrey's last term, meaning he's at his most ambitious- leaving more room for conservative backlash. Guys like John Ashbrook, William Dykes, and Phil Crane are gonna seek higher office, while Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul will hit the scene earlier (Lord knows they tried). In fact, if the Republicans are successful enough, we'd get Speaker of the House Gerald Ford, who then is constantly battling the more conservative members of his caucus. If Rockefeller recruited John Anderson to run for Governor of Illinois in 1972, we could see him at odds with more conservative Republic Midwest governors after 1974...

But I'm rambling now. Maybe Takei can fix all this.

 

[joea64]

I'd be interested knowing why you think so. I'm not seeing the chain of reasoning. (Perhaps for my ignorance of the U.S. political system.)

(Aside to Brainbin: no comment from you on this required. Unless you want.)

Put simply, I think that many if not all of the political troubles of today can ultimately be traced back to the divisions and upheavals of the 1960's and early 1970's, including the quagmire that must not be named and Watergate. We've established that the one ended several years earlier than OTL and the other never happened. What I'm suggesting is that the lesser strains on the body politics ITTL means that moderates in both parties remain stronger and more influential with a corresponding dimunition in influence for the hard left and right. The failure of Nixon's "Southern strategy" in 1968 very likely means that the great switch of white Southerners from the Democrats to the GOP that took place in the 1970's and 1980's will never happen.

Let me repeat that. The 1968 "Southern Strategy" failed. We can already see the effects of that in the 1972 election, where Rockefeller, as the GOP candidate, went back to the traditional Republican constitutencies and made a point of running toward the center, and came very close indeed to winning. Given that by 1976, the electorate will be ready for a change in the White House (with the Executive Mansion having been occupied by Democrats for 16 years), a Republican candidate who follows the same strategy as Rockefeller is likely to win solidly. Going forward, amont other things, this opens up the very interesting possibility that African-Americans in the South might continue to be a viable electoral field for Republicans. I'm even willing to speculate at this point that the Religious Right, while still existing ITTL, is much less influential nationally, possibly even being a regional phenomenon restricted to the South.

 

[Glen]

50% of our top ten are te same for all three - tribbles, mirror, amok, babel, and city

 

[joea64]

Bear in mind, Brainbin never said this would be a utopia. True, it's not going to be a depressing dystopia to the degree of For All Time, or even Fear, Loathing, and Gumbo on the Campaign Trail '72. Even though the author has said he has no interest in making this a political timeline, he should be commended for his realism in addressing American politics.

One thing everyone should understand is that in modern American politics, whenever the Democrats veer too far to the left, there is always right-wing backlash that the GOP takes advantage of. Look at the midterms of 1966, 1994, and 2010. Even here, Brainbin has stated that Humphrey's progressivism has caused a rise in political power of the Larry McDonald/John Rarick types in the South under the wing of Wallace's new party. Say what you want about Nixon, but at least he completed desegregation quietly, with little backlash. No such luck with Humphrey...

I'd expect the 1974 midterms to be a Renaissance for the hard-right in Anerican politics. This is Humphrey's last term, meaning he's at his most ambitious- leaving more room for conservative backlash. Guys like John Ashbrook, William Dykes, and Phil Crane are gonna seek higher office, while Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul will hit the scene earlier (Lord knows they tried). In fact, if the Republicans are successful enough, we'd get Speaker of the House Gerald Ford, who then is constantly battling the more conservative members of his caucus. If Rockefeller recruited John Anderson to run for Governor of Illinois in 1972, we could see him at odds with more conservative Republic Midwest governors after 1974...

But I'm rambling now. Maybe Takei can fix all this.

Vultan, our posts appear to have crossed paths, or I'd have replied to you earlier. I see what you mean, but again, I refer you to what I said earlier. ITTL, Nixon tried this very path and failed. Therefore, the hard-right in the South is gravitating to third-party alternatives such as Wallace, as we saw in the ITTL 1968 and 1972 elections. Rocky came close to winning ITTL 1972 by running toward the center and going back to appealing to the traditional Republican constituencies. I can see a path where a hard-right third party becomes dominant among conservative whites in the South, while blacks and moderate whites become a consistent regional battleground between the Democratic and Republican parties, meaning that the real contest in the Southern states in future presidential elections ITTL will be between the right-wing third party and whichever of the two mainstream parties can put together a moderate coalition in those states.

 

[vultan]

Vultan, our posts appear to have crossed paths, or I'd have replied to you earlier. I see what you mean, but again, I refer you to what I said earlier. ITTL, Nixon tried this very path and failed. Therefore, the hard-right in the South is gravitating to third-party alternatives such as Wallace, as we saw in the ITTL 1968 and 1972 elections. Rocky came close to winning ITTL 1972 by running toward the center and going back to appealing to the traditional Republican constituencies. I can see a path where a hard-right third party becomes dominant among conservative whites in the South, while blacks and moderate whites become a consistent regional battleground between the Democratic and Republican parties, meaning that the real contest in the Southern states in future presidential elections ITTL will be between the right-wing third party and whichever of the two mainstream parties can put together a moderate coalition in those states.

Ah, but you forget a few things. Conservatives exist outside the South in electorally significant numbers. Humphrey won several Western states in all likelihood due to, among other things, vote-splitting among conservatives between Rocky and Wallace. Heck, Brainbin even said the Democrats narrowly won California due to quite a few Republicans writing in Reagan. Then, of course, there's the fabled white working-class demographic ("the Archie Bunker vote"), which the GOP will try to make inroads into even if they abandon the Southern Strategy.

Then remember that the South is still winnable by the GOP. Even without an explicit Southern Strategy, the GOP can look at the 1964 elections (not just the presidential race) and the 1966 midterms. Rocky won TN and SC, yes, but only after some heavy campaigning by Southern conservatives.

So the main takeaway the GOP leadership is getting from 1968 and 1972 is "we would've won, had we gotten just a couple more conservatives". They have and will continue to benefit from the right-wing backlash to Humphrey, and Wallace won't live forever. And besides, after the defeats of 1964, 1968, and 1972, who's the shoe-in to take the GOP nomination in 1976?

 

[phx1138]

the absence of a Nixon presidency is going to have huge ramifications on political culture in America.

I don't doubt it, I just don't know it well enough to see forward.

phx and I also have 60% concordance in top ten.

And he has 70% with Brainbin.

Small sample size.

Put simply, ...

That makes it much clearer. The idea of backlash makes a lot of sense to me, too, tho, so I wonder if a more successful (than OTL) left Democrat doesn't lead to some of the same results (Gingrich, frex), back to my suggestion of "inertia": small changes, yes; really radical ones, harder to get. (Or, at least, at any given point: by 2012, a "no Tea Party" TL with this POD is perfectly credible.)

 

[Brainbin]

Nine posts in two hours?! This thread never fails to be full of surprises...

Coming in (as usual) a few days late, but one hopes, not a dollar short.

Better late than never!

I do have a comment to make on Jackie Chan's comparatively disappointing track record in Hollywood. Brainbin provisionally attributes it to Hollywood's tighter safety standards, which is likely true enough, but I'd add - and this doesn't contradict what he says - that by the time Jackie arrived in Hollywood, he had been REALLY banged up as a result of all the crazy dangerous awesome stunts he'd done in his glory days. If memory serves, he had sustained such a severe head (or spine) injury on one movie shoot - Supercop? Armour of God? I don't remember - that his doctors had explicitly forbidden him ever to undertake any stunt of the same nature that caused him to get hurt that way, ever again. So it was the case that by the time Jackie "hit the big time", at least by Hollywood's way of thinking, he just couldn't do some of the things that had made him famous worldwide anymore.

No doubt that was a major contributing factor, and certainly one that was more pressing to him personally - though I strongly suspect that, had he remained in Hong Kong, he would have been far less likely to ultimately heed their medical advice. Hitting it big stateside, in all likelihood, quite literally saved his life. As for some of his many injuries, to the uninitiated: here is a good place to start.

That, and the fact that a lot of the Hollywood scripts he got were just plain crappy.

Par for the course, alas. Rumble in the Bronx came out in 1995; by that time, all of the greatest action movies in the Hollywood canon had already been made, and there was no real place for Jackie. (And yes, this means that Bruce Lee has a much greater upside ITTL.)

Brainbin, I'd venture, if you're right about Takei's political mindset, that he may eventually decide to run for the California state legislature or even Congress ITTL.

We'll just have to see where Takei finds himself. I've already decided, and I've even developed an intriguing narrative hook about it.

Glen's Top Twenty Star Trek Episodes (at least today):

You list a full quarter of all episodes of Star Trek and "The Doomsday Machine" is not one of them?! Not to mention, some of those which you have included are real head-scratchers, but I accept your justification. I myself have a soft spot for a few episodes that many others seem to strongly dislike. Something I've noticed about "The Doomsday Machine" is that you either love the episode and consider it one of the show's very best (as I do), or you're lukewarm to distateful on it (as, apparently, you are).

So Brainbin and I only share 60% concordance between our top 10, and if I throw in his honorable mentions our lists only have 7 episodes shared in our top 15 and 8 shared episodes total.

If I were to add five more honourable mentions to bring it to an even twenty, they would be: "Dagger of the Mind", "The Conscience of the King", "Space Seed", "A Taste of Armageddon", and "I, Mudd"; that brings us to ten shared episodes total.

So I await a filmed adaptation. (A little Desilu payback? In lieu of salary?)

Gerrold was very compensated for his time on Star Trek. And he's already getting unprecedented fringe benefits in being designated the show's authorized chronicler. And Desilu doesn't make movies. At least, not on the big screen...

These shows, in the original, were paced & cut together really well (except "Tribbles", which, based on what David says in the book, could use a comprehensive re-edit from original footage, if it exists).

Agreed - but as to "Tribbles", having read the book, my recollections are of two minor quibbles that Gerrold had with the finished product: the close-up (instead of a medium shot) on Koloth as he says "inessentials" and traces a womanly outline in the air (which, granted, is a fair complaint, but I still got the "gist" of what he was doing); and, after Uhura receives the tribble, the reaction shot of Cyrano grinning in appreciation (when a much better shot was filmed of both Cyrano and the bartender grinning). The latter instance, I agree, would be much improved with the original shot, but it's a minor blemish on an otherwise excellently-edited episode.

No, as said, "if you feel like". In future, perhaps? (Or not.) Past, when you're done, perhaps. (Or not.) I by no means ask for additional work which will interfere with the ongoing.

Duly noted. You may have to wait for a year or two, just letting you know

Huh. An "insert commercial here"? That's got to make continuity a real adventure.

Luckily, people famously didn't care for continuity in the "Mork & Mindy" era.

*ahem* It would be near (or at) the bottom. Because TBH I'm not much one for Top 10s.

That's still much better than not even appearing in a list of twenty, Glen

I like your list. Surprisingly predictable, considering that you made it, with no real head-scratchers and no glaring omissions.

And I'm very surprised any were 3d season; the underlying premises of some of those were pretty good (including, frex, "For the World is Hollow"), but the execution sucked.

That's definitely a huge problem throughout the Turd Season, which is why I changed so few of the episodes for the third season ITTL. "The Enterprise Incident", for example, isn't really one of my favourite episodes (I kept demoting it from each round of Honourable Mentions, as I remembered shows that I liked better), but it really does have such strong potential, which is fully realized ITTL.

The recognition they cost way more than they're generally worth shouldn't be affected much TTL. Or does that apply only to original musicals, where the cost of the music isn't (mostly) already paid for?

I think you're on to something there. Original musicals ended largely with the Golden Age; adaptations continued well into the 1970s.

Agreed on all counts. That said (& if this was addressed & I've forgotten, apologies), does Lucy never work as an actress again?

I'm not saying she won't make the occasional one-shot appearance or cameo, but full-time commitments are a thing of the past.

Bear in mind, Brainbin never said this would be a utopia. True, it's not going to be a depressing dystopia to the degree of For All Time, or even Fear, Loathing, and Gumbo on the Campaign Trail '72. Even though the author has said he has no interest in making this a political timeline, he should be commended for his realism in addressing American politics.

Thank you, vultan And as you personally know, I get by with a little help from my friends. (Yes, that was another Beatles reference.)

But I'm rambling now. Maybe Takei can fix all this.

"Warp Speed Ahead with Takei for [verboten]!"

Put simply, I think that many if not all of the political troubles of today can ultimately be traced back to the divisions and upheavals of the 1960's and early 1970's, including the quagmire that must not be named and Watergate.

Having been a child in the 1990s, and growing up outside of the United States (though close enough to be a very intimate observer), I still remember the myriad references to the overseas quagmire and Watergate. In the 1990s. On new programming. It was ubiquitous, and inescapable. They were still talking about it, as if it had happened just yesterday. They also assumed that the viewer was intimately familiar with them, and a result I didn't find out what Watergate actually was until I was in high school. And after all that build-up, I still remember thinking "That's it? That's all he did?" So I definitely agree with you in that sense.

50% of our top ten are te same for all three - tribbles, mirror, amok, babel, and city

An interesting observation, but unfortunately, the sample size is far too small to draw any meaningful conclusions.

I can see a path where a hard-right third party becomes dominant among conservative whites in the South, while blacks and moderate whites become a consistent regional battleground between the Democratic and Republican parties

In the short term, this is definitely the likeliest possibility. Wallace is building an infrastructure, and he will not rest until he can throw a spanner in the works. He came so tantalizingly close last time, in both the Electoral College and both Houses of Congress, so he's bound to try again, at least a few more times. In the longer term? No comment, obviously

Heck, Brainbin even said the Democrats narrowly won California due to quite a few Republicans writing in Reagan.

Technically, Humphrey's margin over Rockefeller was larger than the number of write-in votes for Reagan. A few other factors along the same lines were in play, though; it being Schmidt's home state definitely helped the AIP siphon off votes, and no small number of conservatives probably stayed home or spoiled their ballot. Also, there were some factors working for Humphrey (Takei campaigning for him is one small example of this.) You may be thinking of the 1968 campaign ITTL, in which Nixon won his home state by a closer margin than the number of write-in votes for McCarthy (about 25,000).

Then remember that the South is still winnable by the GOP. Even without an explicit Southern Strategy, the GOP can look at the 1964 elections (not just the presidential race) and the 1966 midterms. Rocky won TN and SC, yes, but only after some heavy campaigning by Southern conservatives.

Also note that his own brother couldn't deliver his home state of Arkansas to the GOP (in fact, they finished third).

They have and will continue to benefit from the right-wing backlash to Humphrey, and Wallace won't live forever.

By the same token, they would also be the prime beneficiaries of any moderate or independent backlash to Humphrey. As to Wallace, he is not paralyzed ITTL, and his continuing robustness will be a definite thorn in the side to both of the other parties. One other thing worth noting is that other prominent figures in the American Party (including Rep. Flowers and Sen. Maddox) are emerging. Their long-term viability is far from assured, but they will not go gentle into that good night.

And besides, after the defeats of 1964, 1968, and 1972, who's the shoe-in to take the GOP nomination in 1976?

Everyone keeps suggesting this cowboy actor. Sounds pretty "out there" if you ask me

Small sample size.

Indeed. Come on, you guys! We need more data points. Don't make me call you out by name!

 

[Glen]

Just out of curiosity which are the headscratchers,Brainbin? Maybe I can explain some of the attraction.

 

[Falkenburg]

This was harder than I thought it would be, having not watched them all for a considerable time.

#1 Mirror, Mirror
#2 Balance Of Terror
#3 City On The Edge Of Forever
#4 The Trouble With Tribbles
#5 Amok Time
#6 This Side Of Paradise
#7 The Enemy Within
#8 The Doomsday Machine
#9 Arena
#10 The Empath

Honorable mention to A Piece Of The Action.
I am tempted to add Journey To Babel and For The World Is Hollow... but where then would one stop?
Oh and Slainte!

Falkenburg

 

[Glen]

And now we have a quartet! And our concordance for the four is four (at least out of the top ten) - Mirror, Mirror, City on the Edge of Forever, The Trouble with Tribbles, Amok Time. My own personal concordance with Falkenburg is 5 of 10.

This was harder than I thought it would be, having not watched them all for a considerable time.

#1 Mirror, Mirror
#2 Balance Of Terror
#3 City On The Edge Of Forever
#4 The Trouble With Tribbles
#5 Amok Time
#6 This Side Of Paradise
#7 The Enemy Within
#8 The Doomsday Machine
#9 Arena
#10 The Empath

Honorable mentions to A Piece Of The Action and Journey to Babel.
I am tempted to add Journey To Babel and For The World Is Hollow... but where then would one stop?
Oh and Slainte!

Falkenburg

....
*ahem* It would be near (or at) the bottom. Because TBH I'm not much one for Top 10s.

• "Tribbles" (A very different look at the gang, & one of only 2 where it actually makes sense for the Big 3 to be off-ship.)
• "Amok Time" (except the ending... The look inside Spock's background, & Vulcan, is a treat. So is Arlene Martel.)
• "Journey To Babel" (Mark Lenard makes it work.)
• "Mirror, Mirror" (The "Dark Enterprise" was good, but the method was a laugh...)
• "The Devil in the Dark" (A really nice switch on the "thing from outer space".)
• "The Enterprise Incident" (I liked the treatment of the Romulans, & the Romulan commander, & a "Spock romance" for a change.)
• "Doomsday Machine" (Allegory was a bit strong, & Decker a bit over the top, but for a change, it's not Scotty patching Enterprise up with spit & chewing gum just in time...)
• "City" (Sorry, but that convenient blind walk in front of the truck was lame.)
• "A Piece of the Action" (A nice look at the reasons why the Prime Directive was a good idea. Too bad they didn't do it more often, like in "Lou Grant". {I bet nobody gets that one.} I also found the humor too heavy-handed.)
• "The Conscience of the King" (SF & mystery-suspense, nicely combined.)

Honorable mention: "Space Seed", on the strength of Montalban's Khan alone.

(Confession: I looked at the WP episode list as a refresher...) I'll also say I'm surprised there were 10; only half of them came immediately to mind. And I'm very surprised any were 3d season; the underlying premises of some of those were pretty good (including, frex, "For the World is Hollow"), but the execution sucked.

Okay, I took a stab at this. Note that this is my 'gut-check' top 20 (when I was going through, I found enough that were contenders to warrant posting the 20 - and yes, I'm cheating by counting I & II of the Menagerie as one episode). Note that some of the ones that I post higher may not be because they are technically better, just hit me more, and on a given day some of these positions might change, even radically, depending on my mood. And of course, they might change if instead I were to take a strictly critical view as to quality - sometimes a really good bit can overcome a lot of flaws for likeability, after all.

Glen's Top Twenty Star Trek Episodes (at least today):

1. The City on the Edge of Forever
2. Mirror, Mirror
3. Amok Time
4. Space Seed
5. Balance of Terror
6. The Trouble with Tribbles
7. The Enterprise Incident
8. Wolf in the Fold
9. The Menagerie (I & II)
10. Journey to Babel
11. A Taste of Armageddon
12. Requiem for Methuselah
13. Errand of Mercy
14. Patterns of Force
15. Arena
16. The Omega Glory
17. Return to Tomorrow
18. The Squire of Gothos
19. The Savage Curtain
20. The Devil in the Dark

So Brainbin and I only share 60% concordance between our top 10, and if I throw in his honorable mentions our lists only have 7 episodes shared in our top 15 and 8 shared episodes total.

....
Glad to hear that even you recognize that episode's greatness Since the Star Trek discussion is mostly over now, we can find new ways of keeping it alive. Would everyone like to list their Top 10 OTL episodes? I'll start with mine. In approximate order of preference:

• "The Doomsday Machine"
• "Mirror, Mirror"
• "The Trouble With Tribbles"
• "The City on the Edge of Forever"
• "Journey To Babel"
• "Balance of Terror"
• "The Devil in the Dark"
• "Amok Time"
• "The Immunity Syndrome"
• "The Corbomite Maneuver"

Hon. Mentions: "The Man Trap", "The Naked Time", "The Squire of Gothos", "A Piece of the Action", "The Tholian Web".

I think you can tell, looking at that list, what my "type" of episode is
.....

 

[phx1138]

or you're lukewarm to distateful on it

Count me in that group. Not a terrible episode, but not the even second or third to come to mind.

Gerrold was very compensated for his time on Star Trek. And he's already getting unprecedented fringe benefits in being designated the show's authorized chronicler. And Desilu doesn't make movies. At least, not on the big screen...

Not suggesting he wasn't well-paid, or that it need be TWR's Own who make the film; a Major Studio To Be Named Later, with a suitably large budget, could be involved.

Agreed - but as to "Tribbles", having read the book, my recollections are of two minor quibbles that Gerrold had with the finished product: the close-up (instead of a medium shot) on Koloth as he says "inessentials" and traces a womanly outline in the air (which, granted, is a fair complaint, but I still got the "gist" of what he was doing); and, after Uhura receives the tribble, the reaction shot of Cyrano grinning in appreciation (when a much better shot was filmed of both Cyrano and the bartender grinning).

"Comprehensive" not the best choice of words... I had the "nonessentials" in mind (also recalling the book); I'd forgotten about the two-shot he mentioned, which would've been good, too. There were IIRC one or two places it could've been trimmed a fraction to make room for lost grace notes.

Duly noted. You may have to wait for a year or two, just letting you know

I'll be here.

I like your list. Surprisingly predictable, considering that you made it, with no real head-scratchers and no glaring omissions.

I'm not sure if that's a good thing. I'd really have limited it to the top 5; after that, it's starting to be a stretch to fill a list.

"The Enterprise Incident", for example, isn't really one of my favourite episodes (I kept demoting it from each round of Honourable Mentions, as I remembered shows that I liked better), but it really does have such strong potential, which is fully realized ITTL.

Agreed, it's better than the execution makes it look. And actually, "Balance of Terror" works better as done xTOS than in the original. (If it owes anything to "Run Silent, Run Deep", I don't see it.)

I think you're on to something there. Original musicals ended largely with the Golden Age; adaptations continued well into the 1970s.

I'm recalling something somebody said once about why musicals stopped being made: paying for all-new music cost too much. (Suits strike again.)

I'm not saying she won't make the occasional one-shot appearance or cameo, but full-time commitments are a thing of the past.

Oh, I just meant the occasional movie (theatrical or TVM).

Yes, that was another Beatles reference.

You do realize, don't you, they broke up in 1970? (I'm not infected by the evidently pervasive belief they're the best thing to happen to music since notes.)

Having been a child in the 1990s, and growing up outside of the United States (though close enough to be a very intimate observer), I still remember the myriad references to the overseas quagmire and Watergate. In the 1990s. On new programming. It was ubiquitous, and inescapable. They were still talking about it, as if it had happened just yesterday. They also assumed that the viewer was intimately familiar with them, and a result I didn't find out what Watergate actually was until I was in high school. And after all that build-up, I still remember thinking "That's it? That's all he did?" So I definitely agree with you in that sense.

I found myself sharing some of the outrage when I finally learned, some years later, what was really going on. (At the time, too young to really notice or care. Not a budding Clinton, by any means.) Some outrage that he'd lied about it, & some that he'd gone out of his way to cover it up, & mostly that he'd been spying on people. (I liked my privacy even then.)

Everyone keeps suggesting this cowboy actor. Sounds pretty "out there" if you ask me

You think Redford doesn't have a prayer? (Don't ask me why, but that's the name that came to me when Alan Moore mentioned it in Watchmen.) Something about Reagan always made me think "Muppet", & not genuine candidate, even after years in the White House. He was likable, but not somebody I could take seriously, so I'd happily see him fade into obscurity.

 

[Glen]

On the Doomsday Machine episode I am more in the lukewarm camp. It is not bad (except the machine itself) but there are several little things that just does not make it among my top ones.

I can see how others might take it though.

 

[e of pi]

On the Doomsday Machine episode I am more in the lukewarm camp. It is not bad (except the machine itself) but there are several little things that just does not make it among my top ones.

I can see how others might take it though.

I liked the episode a lot when I first encountered it--in written form in the hardcover Star Trek Reader. Since I didn't end up seeing the actual episode for a few years after I read it, it ended up being a little dissapointing in that sense (an issue a lot of the episodes I read before I saw suffered). However, it was definitely good television, it's just that it had the misfortune that I had unussually high expectations when I finally went to see the episode--Hype Aversion in action, eh?

 

[Glen]

I liked the episode a lot when I first encountered it--in written form in the hardcover Star Trek Reader. Since I didn't end up seeing the actual episode for a few years after I read it, it ended up being a little dissapointing in that sense (an issue a lot of the episodes I read before I saw suffered). However, it was definitely good television, it's just that it had the misfortune that I had unussually high expectations when I finally went to see the episode--Hype Aversion in action, eh?

Going from the written word to the television episode - I can see how that might be a letdown!

 

[Brainbin]

Just out of curiosity which are the headscratchers,Brainbin? Maybe I can explain some of the attraction.

Well, a few aren't my cup of tea at all, but I can find redeeming qualities in them, or at least qualities that I can see some people finding attractive. The real head-scratcher is "The Omega Glory", generally regarded as one of the show's worst episodes (rightly so, IMO). I'm genuinely interested in hearing your explanation for that one - irony is just about the only one that I could get behind. ("Spock's Brain" would definitely make my Top 25 for that reason alone - it's hilarious.)

This was harder than I thought it would be, having not watched them all for a considerable time.

Very solid list, Falkenburg. Thank you for participating

Oh and Slainte!

Ale is good for what ails you!

And now we have a quartet! And our concordance for the four is four (at least out of the top ten) - Mirror, Mirror, City on the Edge of Forever, The Trouble with Tribbles, Amok Time. My own personal concordance with Falkenburg is 5 of 10.

And mine is 6 out of 10. Those episodes to appear on three out of four lists are "The Doomsday Machine", "Journey To Babel", and "Balance of Terror" (all of which appear on only one list - mine). Eleven (or twelve, depending on how you count) distinct episodes are peculiar to just one of our lists. This is some good stuff, but we definitely need more samples. Any more volunteers?

Count me in that group. Not a terrible episode, but not the even second or third to come to mind.

And yet it routinely finishes comfortably within Top 10 lists. But that's how it goes. A lot of movies lacking a passionate fanbase can be found astonishingly high on the IMDb Top 250. (Besides, in case I haven't made it clear: I love the episode.)

Not suggesting he wasn't well-paid, or that it need be TWR's Own who make the film; a Major Studio To Be Named Later, with a suitably large budget, could be involved.

We'll have to see how that works out for him.

I'm not sure if that's a good thing. I'd really have limited it to the top 5; after that, it's starting to be a stretch to fill a list.

I'm not sure if I would go that far, but I agree, my Top 5 is much more solid than my Top 10. And after that it gets a lot more fluid.

Agreed, it's better than the execution makes it look. And actually, "Balance of Terror" works better as done [in Star Trek] than in the original. (If it owes anything to "Run Silent, Run Deep", I don't see it.)

In case you couldn't tell by my list, I love ship-bound episodes. Or episodes where the setting is isolated or claustrophobic enough to be ship-like. ("City" and "Amok Time" are strong enough in other ways that they transcend this bias.) But the genius in "Balance of Terror" was showing us the villain, who is both compelling and brilliantly portrayed (Lenard, all by himself, elevates his two episodes into all-time classics), and an excellent counterpart to Kirk (better than even Khan, IMO). Exquisite chess mastery on both sides.

Oh, I just meant the occasional movie (theatrical or TVM).

No, not even there, unless it's a brief cameo. She's the busiest woman in Hollywood, don't you know.

You do realize, don't you, they broke up in 1970? (I'm not infected by the evidently pervasive belief they're the best thing to happen to music since notes.)

Termite Terrace closed in 1969. Gilbert and Sullivan stopped making operettas together in 1896. Beethoven finished composing his Ninth Symphony in 1824. Shakespeare wrote his last play in 1611. Have we stopped referencing or discussing any of those things? I'm not even that big a fan of the Beatles, but many people are familiar with them, and appreciate references to them. It's something that they have in common. That is, after all, the very foundation of popular culture

On the Doomsday Machine episode I am more in the lukewarm camp. It is not bad (except the machine itself) but there are several little things that just does not make it among my top ones.

Fair enough. I could go on for some length about how much I love that episode, but I'll spare you my fanboy gushing

I liked the episode a lot when I first encountered it--in written form in the hardcover Star Trek Reader. Since I didn't end up seeing the actual episode for a few years after I read it, it ended up being a little dissapointing in that sense (an issue a lot of the episodes I read before I saw suffered). However, it was definitely good television, it's just that it had the misfortune that I had unussually high expectations when I finally went to see the episode--Hype Aversion in action, eh?

Indeed. A very potent phenomenon, that Hype Aversion

I think part of the reason that I love "The Doomsday Machine" so much is that I went in with no real expectation. I had heard of the famous "planet killer", but on the whole, that episode makes surprisingly little impact in popular culture, especially relative to its level of acclaim (this may be because it's so highly derivative of Moby-Dick). Contrast "Mirror, Mirror" or "Amok Time", which everybody knows about, even if they've never seen Star Trek. In any event, I was able to appreciate that episode on its own terms.

The next update will be ready this weekend! Thank you all for your patience. Until then!

 

[Glen]

I like a lot of things about The Omega Glory. I like te twists of the disease that will not let them leave the planet - until they learn it is just temporary as opposed to being magially cured by McCoy in two days or less). I like that the Yangs really have their warts and own agenda and turn out to have lost their way. I love the fact thatsomeone calls Spock on looking like the devil. And I like the pontificating Kirk does when he reveals the real meaning of their holy words. For once he has a reason to be on his high horse. I still get a bit of chills when he reveals the real meanig of those words. Yes it goes over the top at times and yes I usually hate the paralle earths they keep running into (if only they wrote them in as parallel timelines they were travewlling to instead!). But that is why I like it.

 

[Lord Insane]

Really, it wasn't that common an occurence. They ran into parallel Earths, what, three times out of 79 (892-IV, Miri's Homeworld, Omega IV)? Neither Ekos nor Sigma Iota II were actually parallel to Earth, they'd just been culturally contaminated by Earth influences, and Amerind had been influenced and possibly transplanted by some other space-faring culture.

 

[phx1138]

"Spock's Brain" would definitely make my Top 25 ... it's hilarious.

(OK, I know, humor is a difficult concept. And very personal.)

in case I haven't made it clear: I love the episode.)

You were clear, & that's reason enough. Somebody else dislikes it, scroom.

We'll have to see how that works out for him.

I'm not sure if I would go that far, but I agree, my Top 5 is much more solid than my Top 10. And after that it gets a lot more fluid.

Only speaking for me. After my "top 5", there were 3 or 4 not bad ones, & a couple of "maybe"s.

In case you couldn't tell by my list, I love ship-bound episodes.

You've have given Justman a stroke, had you been in charge.

the genius in "Balance of Terror" was showing us the villain, who is both compelling and brilliantly portrayed (Lenard, all by himself, elevates his two episodes into all-time classics)

With that, I entirely agree. The big flaw, for me, was following "Enemy Below" way too closely (tho at least here it made actual sense...)

an excellent counterpart to Kirk (better than even Khan, IMO).

I'd agree, except he was too atypical Romulan for the era IMO.

No, not even there, unless it's a brief cameo. She's the busiest woman in Hollywood, don't you know.

I had a hint.

Termite Terrace closed in 1969. Gilbert and Sullivan stopped making operettas together in 1896. Beethoven finished composing his Ninth Symphony in 1824. Shakespeare wrote his last play in 1611. Have we stopped referencing or discussing any of those things? I'm not even that big a fan of the Beatles, but many people are familiar with them, and appreciate references to them. It's something that they have in common. That is, after all, the very foundation of popular culture

Fair enough. I just get tired of, first, everybody defining the world around them, & second, gushing how great they are. I'm not, needless to say, an acolyte of that cult.

I like a lot of things about The Omega Glory. I like te twists of the disease that will not let them leave the planet - until they learn it is just temporary as opposed to being magially cured by McCoy in two days or less). I like that the Yangs really have their warts and own agenda and turn out to have lost their way. I love the fact thatsomeone calls Spock on looking like the devil. And I like the pontificating Kirk does when he reveals the real meaning of their holy words.

For me, it's that last bit, & the beat me over the head obvious parallel that undoes the episode. (It's not helped by the similarity of the plague to "Miri".) And while I know the show could never have done it, this is a really, really good example of why they should've used recurring characters more: they could've left them behind. (That would also have needed the concept to be less episodic, with more "carryover" of stories between shows, & AFAIK, that wasn't done outside the soaps yet.)

Really, it wasn't that common

Often enough to make me think it was too often. All they needed was to be more subtle. Frex, the *Romans could have been in Japanese feudal costume & their "emperor" could've been a k'inich (Maya king). or tlatoani, & those *Nazis could've worn French or Canadian uniforms. (So the Nazis had the coolest ones....) Some of that was budget, I suspect: they had to buy off the rack rather than use bespoke...

 

[ChucK Y]

My top 10 list:

1. The City of the Edge of Forever
2. Balance of Terror
3. Mirror, Mirror
4. The Trouble With Tribbles
5. Space Seed
6. The Naked Time
7. Miri
8. Devil in the Dark
9. The Day of the Dove
10. A Piece of the Action

 

[Lord Insane]

Often enough to make me think it was too often. All they needed was to be more subtle. Frex, the *Romans could have been in Japanese feudal costume & their "emperor" could've been a k'inich (Maya king). or tlatoani, & those *Nazis could've worn French or Canadian uniforms. (So the Nazis had the coolest ones....) Some of that was budget, I suspect: they had to buy off the rack rather than use bespoke...

The *Nazis weren't *Nazis, they were Nazis. The reason for them being on Ekos was deliberate cultural contamination from an insane Earth historian, remember?