PillowRock
Regular
I haven't read Harlan's version either.
Remember when SciFi (US) first got the rights to ST:TOS and they made it an event by giving them a 90 minute time slot, so that they could fit in the current standard amount of commercials and still show the entire original episode, and filled in the rest of the time with new interview footage with the cast and crew (which was shown at the beginning and end of the commercial breaks)? (I actually thought that was one of the cooler programming ideas that Skiffy has had.)
Well, for that episode they had a bunch of footage of Harlan talking about that stuff. It was kinda neat, because the people editing that together for the SciFi airings were far enough removed from the original production company that would leave in comments about how he thought GR had ruined his story. Anyway, HE said that it was (in *his* opinion, obviously) much more "poignant" (I'm pretty sure that was his word.) to have Kirk literally willing to sacrifice the world for love.
I've never been convinced of that, and you point out some very valid points, but I can see how one *might* make that argument IF (and this is an important condition) you are speaking only about the single episode as a stand-alone. When it is part of an ongoing series, the conditions change. At that point you would also be setting a precedent that lead in your heroic action adventure series (remembering that this was *very often* a morality play during the Cold War) would be willing to subjugate the "greater good" of many billions to his personal desires. I just don't think that was a precedent that they would ever want to set in their show.
Remember when SciFi (US) first got the rights to ST:TOS and they made it an event by giving them a 90 minute time slot, so that they could fit in the current standard amount of commercials and still show the entire original episode, and filled in the rest of the time with new interview footage with the cast and crew (which was shown at the beginning and end of the commercial breaks)? (I actually thought that was one of the cooler programming ideas that Skiffy has had.)
Well, for that episode they had a bunch of footage of Harlan talking about that stuff. It was kinda neat, because the people editing that together for the SciFi airings were far enough removed from the original production company that would leave in comments about how he thought GR had ruined his story. Anyway, HE said that it was (in *his* opinion, obviously) much more "poignant" (I'm pretty sure that was his word.) to have Kirk literally willing to sacrifice the world for love.
I've never been convinced of that, and you point out some very valid points, but I can see how one *might* make that argument IF (and this is an important condition) you are speaking only about the single episode as a stand-alone. When it is part of an ongoing series, the conditions change. At that point you would also be setting a precedent that lead in your heroic action adventure series (remembering that this was *very often* a morality play during the Cold War) would be willing to subjugate the "greater good" of many billions to his personal desires. I just don't think that was a precedent that they would ever want to set in their show.