Star Trek having a cheap / low budget a misnomer?

[Ssosmcin]

Sony/Columbia never kept their masters (TV on home video didn't exist back in the 80's and 90's).

Sure it did. I taped everything I could from 1984 onward, starting with V, Star Trek and IDOJ on a couple of channels. We all know Star Trek started being released on VHS in the mid 80's. By the 90's, I Dream of Jeannie was on official VHS through Columbia House and a couple of standalone releases. I still have my CH tapes.

Until then, the syndicated prints of IDOJ still had subtitles over Jeannie's pre-English speaking scenes in the pilot episode. Some sound effects and music cues in the second season were changed by the early 2000's if not sooner.

Other than that, the IDOJ episodes on DVD are uncut for the most part, although the opening credits don't match the color seasons for seasons 2 and 3. They look fine, so if those are syndication prints, they are complete, story wise, and look great. I have about 10 episodes from the first season on 16mm and other than sponsor and network bumpers (and Lark cigarette packs in the end credits of a couple), the episodes have the same content and run the same length.

If Sony destroyed the original prints, it was probably in the last 20 years. The originals were in circulation for a couple of decades.

They made the DVDs from their syndication copies (it also explains why I Dream of Jeannie: Fifteen Years Later is available on DVD while I Still Dream of Jeannie is not)

I Still Dream of Jeannie, much like its predecessor, isn't worth much preservation. Both were awful (the first reunion ended on a horribly depressing note) and I'm totally fine to never speak of them again.

I was referring to Lew Grade deciding to spend his money making Raise the Titanic instead of Space: 1999 Year 3, which is what I've read from the very reliable @Ssosmcin.

The info I got was that the budget for Space: 1999 was reallocated to pay for Raise the Titanic, which began production in 1977 (and stalling a few times before filming began in 1979), with money used to build models and a tank. However, I have also read reports that refuted this.

 

[Danja]

I Still Dream of Jeannie, much like its predecessor, isn't worth much preservation. Both were awful (the first reunion ended on a horribly depressing note) and I'm totally fine to never speak of them again.

YMMV.

I prefer I Still Dream of Jeannie to Fifteen Years Later (The film dipped its big toe into horror. Jeannie channeled Carrie! )

The film leaned more into the fantasy/supernatural than Fifteen Years Later did and was much less ha-ha sitcom (The cast in FYL was standing around waiting for the Laff Trak. )

Sure it did. I taped everything I could from 1984 onward, starting with V, Star Trek and IDOJ on a couple of channels. We all know Star Trek started being released on VHS in the mid 80's. By the 90's, I Dream of Jeannie was on official VHS through Columbia House and a couple of standalone releases. I still have my CH tapes.

It was primitive compared to the DVDs and Blu-Rays you get today (Putting 130 episodes on VHS would've consumed a TON of shelf space. )

 

[Ssosmcin]

It was primitive compared to the DVDs and Blu-Rays you get today (Putting 130 episodes on VHS would've consumed a TON of shelf space. )

Yeah but when I got them, popped them in the VCR and watched them on my 27 inch tube set, they looked amazing! 4 episodes per tape = 32 tapes...about what I had on my shelf for Star Trek and Lost In Space already with Columbia house. Back then, I had shelves all along my walls filled with tapes. it was allll part of the fun. I had TNG two episodes per cassette in SP recorded off channel 11, in thick plastic cases. You shoulda seen my collection...

YMMV.

I prefer I Still Dream of Jeannie to Fifteen Years Later (The film dipped its big toe into horror. Jeannie channeled Carrie! )

The film leaned more into the fantasy/supernatural than Fifteen Years Later did and was much less ha-ha sitcom (The cast in FYL was standing around waiting for the Laff Trak. )

Fair enough, but for me though the appeal of IDOJ wasn't just Jeannie. It was the chemistry between Eden and Hagman. Then the chemistry between Hagman, Daily and Rorke. The three of them still pull belly laughs out of me to this day. And the madcap physical comedy that Hagman and Daily brought to it was something that Bewitched and the reunions didn't have.

Jeannie may have been the titular character, but the "I" was Tony. And, unless they were gonna recast them all, Tony was Larry Hagman. Not Wayne Rogers. And certainly not whoever Ken Kercheval was playing in the second one.

The reunions were Jeannie's story as a liberated genie of the 80's and 90's on her own and if that's what you wanted, then you enjoyed it. I wanted to see what Jeannie, Tony, Roger and Dr. Bellows were up to and what we got wasn't that. I didn't necessarily want "more of the same" - I would have been fine with updated Jeannie and her teenage son dealing with the era, but with Hagman as Tony (and I get they tried - halfheartedly - to get him on board) having antics with Roger along with some deadpan Bellows in a larger role, who FINALLY learns what it's all about.

Tony, played by a totally different actor, in space, heading for a meteor and the only way to save him is to erase his memories of Jeannie and their son? Jeez, pass me a Prozac and a bourbon because I feel like jumping off a building.

 

[Danja]

Jeannie may have been the titular character, but the "I" was Tony. And, unless they were gonna recast them all, Tony was Larry Hagman. Not Wayne Rogers. And certainly not whoever Ken Kercheval was playing in the second one.

If I was writing the script, I would've have Jeannie ditch Simpson.

But that's just me.

I would have been fine with updated Jeannie and her teenage son dealing with the era, but with Hagman as Tony (and I get they tried - halfheartedly - to get him on board) having antics with Roger along with some deadpan Bellows in a larger role, who FINALLY learns what it's all about.

Hayden Rorke died in 1987 (Fifteen Years Later was his final role). Bringing him back for ISDoJ wouldn't have been possible.

Tony, played by a totally different actor, in space, heading for a meteor and the only way to save him is to erase his memories of Jeannie and their son? Jeez, pass me a Prozac and a bourbon because I feel like jumping off a building.

One more reason why I prefer I Still Dream of Jeannie.

 

[Ssosmcin]

Hayden Rorke died in 1987 (Fifteen Years Later was his final role). Bringing him back for ISDoJ wouldn't have been possible.

I knew that, I wasn't asking for a deceased actor to come back for the second film. I wanted Bellows to be a larger part of the story. His cameo is 15 Years Later was hardly satisfying, considering his importance in the series. Maybe it had to do with his health at his age, but the lack of focus on the core cast is what bothers me about these. Imagine the Star Trek movies with just Nimoy in the main role (with his mirror version), cameos by Shatner and Kelley, and a whole new cast of characters. It stops being the original concept and becomes about a single character. Which is why the IDOJ reunions don't exist for me. Even the Six Million Dollar Man reunions were closer to the original series.

But, it's all personal preference. Most of these reunion specials were hit or miss and usually miss.

 

[Christopher]

I knew that, I wasn't asking for a deceased actor to come back for the second film. I wanted Bellows to be a larger part of the story. His cameo is 15 Years Later was hardly satisfying, considering his importance in the series. Maybe it had to do with his health at his age, but the lack of focus on the core cast is what bothers me about these. Imagine the Star Trek movies with just Nimoy in the main role (with his mirror version), cameos by Shatner and Kelley, and a whole new cast of characters. It stops being the original concept and becomes about a single character. Which is why the IDOJ reunions don't exist for me. Even the Six Million Dollar Man reunions were closer to the original series.

But, it's all personal preference. Most of these reunion specials were hit or miss and usually miss.

Sort of reminds me of The Nude Bomb, the Get Smart revival movie that only brought back Don Adams and one recurring (recast) bit character from the series, and left out the rest of the cast. It was a decent James Bond pastiche, but a terrible Get Smart revival; Max without 99 is like Kirk without Spock. The TV movie Get Smart, Again! nine years later was a much better revival, bringing back all the surviving cast members and feeling like a much more authentic continuation.

How did we get onto this sidebar anyway?

 

[fireproof78]

was primitive compared to the DVDs and Blu-Rays you get today (Putting 130 episodes on VHS would've consumed a TON of shelf space. )

I still prefer the primitive VHS and have a small collection and enjoy them.

Easier than Blu Ray sometimes.

 

[IanFryer]

From the 'M:I' book.
The network even kicked in additional funds to help defray Desilu's enormous deficit. "We had to come up with some monies to help them out," Mike Dann acknowledges. "No matter what your licensing cost is, you have the problem of them saying, 'Okay, we'll do the next four shows in one room,' which they can, legally. So we did have to come up with the extra monies." It wasn't nearly enough to keep Mission out of the red - but that was Desilu's problem.​

Hah! That's rather like in TOS third season when we had a lot of ship-bound episodes. At least Star Trek had a very attractive group of standing sets to use. I gather the much-maligned Fred Frieberger was very much caught between Paramount wanting to cut costs and NBC requesting more visual variety. An occasional 'bottle episode', as a one-set, small cast episode used to be known, can be a good thing. The best examples are very intense and theatrical, such as the amazing The Prisoner episode Once Upon A Time. It's not sustainable for a run of episodes in a filmed series, though.

 

[DarrenTR1970]

Hah! That's rather like in TOS third season when we had a lot of ship-bound episodes. At least Star Trek had a very attractive group of standing sets to use. I gather the much-maligned Fred Frieberger was very much caught between Paramount wanting to cut costs and NBC requesting more visual variety. An occasional 'bottle episode', as a one-set, small cast episode used to be known, can be a good thing. The best examples are very intense and theatrical, such as the amazing The Prisoner episode Once Upon A Time. It's not sustainable for a run of episodes in a filmed series, though.

Ironically, while Star Trek saw its budget slashed, as I've previously posted, Mission: Impossible's third season proved to be its most expensive yet, with every episode except one, The Diplomat, exceeding its budget. The end result was that it ended up costing Paramount $830,000.
The end result was twofold.
One - while CBS fully supported Geller and Mission: Impossible, the executives at Paramount did not, and Paramount was unwilling work with CBS to control costs; so, Paramount shopped its pilots/shows to other networks and quickly sold Love, American Style, The Brady Bunch, and The Odd Couple to ABC. Paramount used that as leverage and was then able to go to Geller and say, 'We don't have the money to spend on your show, because we're spending it on these other shows on another network. You're going to have to cut costs.'
And the way that Geller and Mission: Impossible did that was by shifting the focus away from international espionage to domestic threats, because it was easier to film contemporary locations/clothing than trying to find foreign looking locations in and around Los Angeles and creating foreign looking uniforms and signage.
Another, more catastrophic result, was that Paramount was unwilling to spend money on salaries, and when it came time to negotiate Martin Landau's contract, the studio refused Landau's salary demands, which led to him quitting the show, quickly followed by his wife Barbara Bain.​

 

[Christopher]

And the way that Geller and Mission: Impossible did that was by shifting the focus away from international espionage to domestic threats, because it was easier to film contemporary locations/clothing than trying to find foreign looking locations in and around Los Angeles and creating foreign looking uniforms and signage.

I doubt it made that much difference, since half their "foreign locations" looked like the office buildings on the Paramount lot.

 

[Danja]

I doubt it made that much difference, since half their "foreign locations" looked like the office buildings on the Paramount lot.

Much in the same manner that Stargate's alien planets all manage to look like the forests around Vancouver, British Columbia.

 

[Nerys Myk]

Much in the same manner that Stargate's alien planets all manage to look like the forests around Vancouver, British Columbia.

A lot of planets have a Vancouver.

 

[DarrenTR1970]

I was going to edit my previous post, however, since @Christopher already responded to it a portion of it, I'll create a new one.

Another reason for the shift in focus from the foreign to domestic was in part in response to an audience survey Paramount conducted at the end of the third season, where viewers thought that the third season had fallen into a rut with its stories set in foreign locations, unaware that many of the stories were hastily commissioned and written in those frantic days following the abrupt departure of producers and head writers William Read Woodfield and Allan Balter after less than eight episodes were filmed and many of the subsequent stories were first drafts with no time for rewrites.

The poll also asked what the audience liked about the show and the response was, concept, execution, production value, stories with a domestic setting and Peter Graves.

Paramount, unfortunately, took the wrong lessons from this survey. Instead of realizing that the reason for the rut and cost over runs were due in part to the backstage chaos that were beyond Geller's control, they focused on the budget and salaries of its main actors.

The reason Bruce Landsbury was brought in to oversee Mission at the start of the fourth season, was much the same way Harve Bennett was brought in to produce Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan; Bruce could control the costs and oversee the shift from foreign to domestic locations/stories.

 

[Christopher]

Another reason for the shift in focus from the foreign to domestic was in part in response to an audience survey Paramount conducted at the end of the third season, where viewers thought that the third season had fallen into a rut with its stories set in foreign locations

I went back over my blog reviews, and the statistics don't bear this out. In season 3, there were eight episodes set in the United States: the 2-part “The Contender,” “The Execution,” “The Diplomat,” “The Bargain,” “The Freeze,” “The Mind of Stefan Miklos,” and “The System.” That's vs. 12 set in Europe, 2 in Latin America, one in the Mideast, and one in Francophone Africa. So the US was the second-most frequent location in season 3. In season 4, though, only “The Double Circle” and “Mastermind” take place entirely within the United States, while 18 episodes are in Europe, 4 in Latin America, and 2 in the Mideast. So the US is tied for the least-used setting in season 4. It was season 5 that had a record 9 episodes in the US and a record low of 7 in Europe, plus 2 each in Africa and the Caribbean, one primarily in Latin America (with part of the US-based "Flip Side" in Mexico), one in the Mideast, and the original series's only Asia-based episode. And then, of course, it was seasons 6-7 that almost completely abandoned overseas stories in favor of domestic mob-busting.

So it seems to me that the survey must have actually been at the end of season 2 or season 4. I can see how the changes inspired by a survey done post-season 3 might not be implemented until season 5, given the lead time in production, but it doesn't make sense that audiences would say season 3 had too many foreign locations when nearly a third of the season was set domestically. So your book must have gotten the timing wrong.

 

[publiusr]

Creativity and care make all the difference.

I seem to remember a Reddit that had game footage of realistic water/liquids a decade or two back.

The Corridor Crew bagged on some more recent CGI here and there as being sloppy—but were stunned by this old footage:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[mb22]

That effect (and some in the 1931 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) was done like this.

 

[Christopher]

That effect (and some in the 1931 Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde) was done like this.

They used a similar effect on occasion in The Twilight Zone to do in-camera transformations. "The Howling Man" used it to begin a man's transformation into the Devil, and "Long Live Walter Jameson" used it to begin a rapid-aging process. Wikipedia says "Queen of the Nile" used it for a similar effect, though The Twilight Zone Companion doesn't mention it there. But TZ did the shift by changing the lighting gels rather than moving a filter before the camera lens. So it doesn't work quite as well there, since you can see the quality of the light shifting at the same time the transformation starts.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Today I asked chatbot "During the 60s what were considered the most expensive TV shows to produce?

Star Trek came up first at 190K per episode.

I have seen Trek retrospectives where even the production people themselves lament about the " low budget " they had to work with. Obviously compared to motion pictures it had a low budget but not compared to other shows of the time apparently.

Is the whole TOS was done " on the cheap " a misnomer?

Primitive sets, effects and costumes compared to today for sure. But it was not "cheap" to produce at all.

Definitely not cheap. The bridge itself was great looking for being built in 1964. If you look at early episodes like The Cage, Where No Man Has Gone Before, The Man Trap etc. They had pretty nice sized budgets. I love the sets for The Man Trap. Well done. There are lots of other examples. By the second seasons and third season the budgets were cut (mostly in the 3rd) and the quality went down but they still did a great job with episodes like Spectre of the Gun.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

By the second seasons and third season the budgets were cut (mostly in the 3rd) and the quality went down but they still did a great job with episodes like Spectre of the Gun.

Yeah, the budgets were too lean, especially by year 3, but they had the advantage of 2nd and 3rd season "finishing touches" on the bridge set, and it looked better than ever. It was a huge asset just standing there.

I heard somewhere that the bridge was one of the most visited sets in Hollywood. A lot of well-connected people wanted to see it.

 

[TRON JA307020]

Yeah, the budgets were too lean, especially by year 3, but they had the advantage of 2nd and 3rd season "finishing touches" on the bridge set, and it looked better than ever. It was a huge asset just standing there.

I heard somewhere that the bridge was one of the most visited sets in Hollywood. A lot of well-connected people wanted to see it.

It truly looked great on screen. I first saw star trek in re runs when I was 4.or 5 and loved the bridge. I love it just as much today. Never get tired of looking at it. I also love how its been recreated nearly perfectly for fan films. Theres a clean simplicity and warmth on the TOS bridge that we just don't get on the SNW one. A big problem is the lighting in SNW. They use a lot of neon around the railing and consoles to help light the bridge. Just doesnt look as good.