From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: anim8rfsk@cox.net
Subject: Re: IDW Does Harlan Ellison
In article ,
Jim G. wrote:
> anim8rFSK sent the following on Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:04:55 -0700:
> > In article ,
> > Jim G. wrote:
> >
> > > Daniel sent the following on Tue, 15 Jul 2014 21:04:08 +1000:
> > > > 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-
leeps-or-goes-a
> > > > >> way-
> > > > >> harla
> > > > >> n-ellison-and-star-trek-again
> > > > >> or http://preview.tinyurl.com/l4sppdm
> > > > >>
> > > > >> QUOTE
> > > > >> Adapted for the comics by IDWes 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 anose turned
> > > > >> into
> > > > >> ahmmmms.e
> > > > >> 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
> > > > > EllisonAs
> > > > > original script for oThe City on the Edge of Forever,o 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??
> > >
> > > It's almost always mentioned as something worth a revisit, but I think
> > > that everyone is just waiting for Harlan to die so that the chance of a
> > > lawsuit is diminished. I was very surprised not only to see him agree to
> > > this comic book treatment, but for IDW to risk the wrath of Ellison's
> > > lawyers if the little twit ended up unhappy with things. But then again,
> > > I suspect that IDW's own lawyers aren't too shabby, either.
> >
> > Okay, seriously, when have you ever seen HE sue because he didn't like
> > the outcome, as opposed to, they just stole the idea?
>
> I'm thinking "unhappy with things" as in "unhappy that he doesn't get
> everything his way," rather than "unhappy with the outcome."
That's still a birding, and not a suing, offense.
>
> As for stealing his ideas, there are lots of issues with that one. I
> thought that his claim regarding the original Terminator movie was
> stretching reality to the breaking point, for example. YMMV.
First time I saw TERMINATOR I said outloud that it was ripped off from
SOLDIER and THE MAN WHO WAS NEVER BORN. I think DEMON WITH A GLASS HAND
is more of a stretch.
>
> > If he doesn't
> > like the changes, he just gives them the Cordwainer Bird. The people he
> > sues are, for instance, Jim Cameron, who not only stole two of his
> > stories (and a couple from others as well) but went around BRAGGING
> > about it.* He sued and won against Paramount for FUTURE COP, Paramount
> > turning over an inter office menu saying "let's screw over this little
> > Jew and steal his idea" and used the settlement to buy a billboard
> > across the street encouraging writers not to roll over and take it in
> > the backside. He's had a bunch of suits against people that illegally
> > posted his work online. He withdrew his suit against IN TIME when they
> > changed it enough. He sued Paramount for not paying him royalties on
> > CITY for 40 years. He sued the lazy and worthless Writer's Guild for
> > making him sue other people in the first place (heh).
> >
> > When he doesn't like the outcome? He gave the Cordwainer Bird to:
> > 2 episodes of THE HUNGER (the series)
> > 2 movie compilations of THE STARLOST (rather famously)
> > All 16 episodes of THE STARLOST
> > 1 episode of THE FLYING NUN
> > And as near as I can tell, that's it, with no overlap of suing and
> > giving them the Bird.
>
> Those are all fair points, but since when do we allow fair points to
> keep us from picking on Hollywood types here?
Since when do we restrict the unfairness to Hollywood types?
>
> > *The sole exception I know of HE suing over something other than having
> > his work stolen being Fantagraphics, who posted lies about him on their
> > website, and he won, 'cause they were lies, and didn't take any money -
> > all he wanted was their lies taken off their website.
>
> I'm not saying that he was wrong to sue in 100% of the cases where he
> sued. I'm just saying that he has a rep for it, and it's not always a
> case of him being 100% in the right in those cases. I respect his talent
> as a writer; I just have lots of issues with his ability to play well
> with others and to not be a little jerk at times when he doesn't get
> everything his way. "High-maintenance" is a term that perfectly
> describes the guy, IMO.
Sure, but I continue to say that he has zero track record of suing
anybody for any reason other than theft.
--
Wait - are you saying that ClodReamer was wrong, or lying?
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
* Origin: Easynews - www.easynews.com (1:2320/105.97)
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux
* Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1)
|
