From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos   
   From Address: David@block.net   
   Subject: Re: IDW Does Harlan Ellison   
      
   On 7/15/2014 9:23 AM, A Friend wrote:   
   > In article , Daniel   
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 15/07/2014 12:30 PM, A Friend wrote:   
   >>> In article , Jim G.   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> A classic revisited, just as Harlan envisioned it...   
   >>>>   
   >>>> The City that Never Sleeps or Goes Away: Harlan Ellison and Star Trek,   
   >>>> Again   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> http://www.tor.com/blogs/2014/07/the-city-that-never-sleeps   
   or-goes-away-ha   
   >>>> rla   
   >>>> n-ellison-and-star-trek-again   
   >>>> or http://preview.tinyurl.com/l4sppdm   
   >>>>   
   >>>> QUOTE   
   >>>> Adapted for the comics by IDWrCUs primary Trek writers Scott and David   
   >>>> Tipton, and with beautiful art by J.K. Woodward (who did slick work on   
   >>>> the Doctor Who/TNG crossover a few years ago) everything about this   
   >>>> release is totally legit. In the debut issue of this limited run (there   
   >>>> will be five in all) IDW Trek editor Chris Ryall writes fondly about how   
   >>>> this venture was his idea, and one that took some convincing of   
   >>>> everybody to go along with. In his words, over time rCRnosrC# turned into   
   >>>> rCRhmmmms.rC#   
   >>>> END QUOTE   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Okay, so how long until Ellison sues IDW over something about this?   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> I read the original script about 35 years ago, and I don't remember   
   >>> anything about a Bizarro World Enterprise.   
   >>>   
   >>> The article asks the question, "And yet, now nearly 50 years later,   
   >>> with numerous Treks behind us, the question still nags: would EllisonrCOs   
   >>> original script for rCLThe City on the Edge of Forever,rCY have been better   
   >>> than what ended up on screen?" I don't think so. The story is not   
   >>> about Beckwith, it's about Kirk and Edith Keeler, and Kirk's duty to   
   >>> history and the future. The story didn't require Beckwith or anybody   
   >>> like Beckwith. Accidentally overdosing McCoy gets things rolling quite   
   >>> nicely.   
   >>>   
   >>> Ellison's ending -- with Beckwith stuck in a time loop getting   
   >>> annihilated every few seconds inside a nova -- is beyond melodramatic.   
   >>> In the show as seen, Kirk's final line, "Let's get the hell out of   
   >>> here," is powerful, especially in a day when saying "hell" on U.S. tv   
   >>> was a very rare thing indeed.   
   >>>   
   >>> BTW the really confusing thing about City is just how history was   
   >>> changed. Everybody thinks McCoy saved Edith from getting run over by   
   >>> that truck, and that wasn't the case. The creepy little guy at the   
   >>> rescue mission (his name in Ellison's script is Rodent) eventually   
   >>> rapes and murders Edith. He doesn't do so in the changed history   
   >>> because he fiddled with McCoy's phaser and disintegrated himself. The   
   >>> significance of this was purposefully obscured, but that's why the   
   >>> phaser scene is in there. What's also not explained is why Kirk and   
   >>> Spock simply didn't take Edith with them into the future, which would   
   >>> have effectively "killed" her in 1930. Neither story ever explains why   
   >>> Edith's death was necessary.   
   >>>   
   >>> Also, Clark Gable didn't make a movie until 1931.   
   >>>   
   >> Hasn't the Edith Keeler story line been mentioned here as a possible ST   
   >> 13 re-do storyline??   
   >   
   >   
   > Not a chance. Nobody's going to touch it. They don't need the almost   
   > certain litigation. Even the Pocket Books novels and various comics   
   > don't use or refer to City.   
      
   You DO know that this whole thread is about a comic book adaptation of    
   the original script, right?   
      
      
   --- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp   
    * Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (1:2320/105.97)   
   --- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux   
    * Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)   
|