![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I removed the below quote because it didn't fit in the section it was in and I wasn't sure of it's relevance to the article as a whole. If it deserves to be in another part that's fine.
Here is the quote taken from "Prodution" at the end of the second paragraph in that section: "Included is the mention of M'Ress being a Caitian. There is also a hand drawn map of Cait's location in the Lynx constellation." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.110.232.104 ( talk) 23:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone cite the original official reason for the series not being continued? - Eyeresist 06:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC) do they really need one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.85.199 ( talk) 12:32, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
Didn't TAS win an Emmy award for best animated series? 23skidoo 05:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Ya, it did. The award was for best children's show actually.. Infact its apparently the only Star Trek to actually win an Emmy. You can see part of the award ceremonty in the extras on the DVD set. 69.225.0.102 21:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
TAS won an Emmy for its short--but very strong--6 episode season from 1973 to 1974. Leoboudv ( talk) 02:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
According to the FASA RPG, the three armed/legged race were called the Edoans. Could be integrated? 81.76.48.80 18:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Interesting note, in the TAS DVD release, the term "Edosian" gets used throughout the Okuda extras, the video extras, and one of the producers of Enterprise mentions that certain slug-like leeches shown and mentioned in Dr. Phlox's Medical Bay are actually from Arex's planet, "Edoasin Slugs". That the refrence was completely intended. 69.225.0.102 21:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
...I wonder if Star Trek: The Animated Series was the only incarnation to open each episode with the opening credits. Or did it open each episode with the teaser scene before the opening credits? Don-Don 22:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Is there an official statement somewhere somehow about the fact TAS is not canon? Or is that just a long-time urban legend? Gbnogkfs 1 February 2006, 5:50 (UT)
Actually it appears Paramount is changing its stance on the series towards it being canonized again, with how it words things in pack-in booklet, and several articles on paramount. However, with the release of the Animated Series DVD release, studio seems to have changed its stance, and is now calling the animated series part of canon. [2] [3] [4] 69.225.0.102 06:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Personally, as far as the whole canon/non-canon thing goes, I agree with something written in The Agony Booth's review of Mudd's Passion:
No, the real reason I consider TAS canon is that it's a TV show called Star Trek, and it was made with the input of Gene Roddenberry, William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, Deforest Kelley, James Doohan, Nichelle Nichols, George Takei, Majel Barrett-Roddenberry, Walter Koenig, TOS story editor D.C. Fontana, TOS director Marc Daniels, TOS scriptwriters David Gerrold and Stephen Kandel, and TOS guest stars Mark Lenard, Roger C. Carmel, and Stanley Adams. Honestly, if that's not Star Trek, then I don't know what is. It would be tantamount to making an album with performances by John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr, produced by George Martin, engineered by Norman Smith and Geoff Emerick, with an album cover drawn by Klaus fucking Voorman, and not calling it a Beatles album.
Difficult to argue with that sort of logic. :D - 67.191.254.83 21:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
this was pretty much garbage. I have removed. Some of the references I checked into simply didn't check out at the first time, so I added an actual explanation of the canon status, based on printed reliable sources at the Star Trek: The Animated Series#Canon status section. Having two sections about this, one containing badly sourced information and gives undue weight to a minuscule debate within fandom, and one containing actual information about what writers were and weren't allowed to do). The Spaceflight Chronology does not contain any such text as is attributed to it here. Startrek.com whilst it is an official site, the canon stuff about it editorial opinion, not a pronouncement ex cathedra. etc etc. Stardates mean bugger all in TOS, and its ludicrous to even consider them for dating. There was nothing salvageable in the section. What we might note is that the Voyages of the Imagination timeline puts TAS in 2269-2270 and Okuda doesn't leave any space for it. We can do that in a sentence or maybe two if we were being wordy. Morwen - Talk 20:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
You wrote:
I belive you are referencing the "Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda." The book I am refering to is "*
Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology (Fred & Stan Goldstein, with
Rick Sternbach -- Dec 24, 1979)." This is different book, published before any of the subsequent series had been made.
Jason Palpatine
00:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah, interesting. I appear to have a different edition of the Spaceflight Chronology, which doesn't have a page 180. Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention, I shall see what I can do to source it. Nontheless, the section is still godawful and improperly sourced in many many other ways and you should revert yourself forthwith to remove it againI have removed it again. A list of things that the article claims now that are not correct:
Please check our policies about WP:V and WP:NOR. I removed this section for good reasons, and superficially adding sources doesn't fix its fundamental brokenness.
I replaced the section with the one at Star Trek: The Animated Series#Canon issues, so additionally, having 2 sections, both talking about whether TAS is canon or not, and where it is dated, is pretty non-optimal. If there are any specific points in the text deleted that you think can be adequately sourced to Wikipedia standards then please feel free to put these in this section, with appropriate wording : or maybe point out things to me and I will do them. but please don't revert this big wodge of text back there. Morwen - Talk 22:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I bought the Official Star Trek 30th Anniversary book because it had an image from ST:TAS on the cover. Inside it had one more small image and a mere one or two paragraphs on the series. I'd have to dig it out of storage to check, but I don't recall the book having an episode list for ST:TAS. If someone else has this book and could verify how little text there is and whether or not the book lists the episodes, then this abominable slight towards this series can be added to this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.136.145.239 ( talk) 06:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC).
Why didn't they use the theme song from TOS? Were their copyright/legal reasons that they had to use an altered theme song? Or, did they feel that a slightly different theme song would give the animated series a fresh new feel? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.65.69.43 ( talk • contribs) 17:32, Jun 30, 2007 (UTC).
It would be very helpful to know why the original theme wasn't used. Perhaps also due to budget constraints to license the original work? I wonder if Courage was approached. Unfortunately, the TAS theme is a poor imitation of the signature music. St.Mark'sPizza ( talk) 14:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Where did this statement come from - that the Kzinti were to have appeared in the fifth season of Enterprise? Unless someone can find a source for that, I think it should be removed as speculative. 68.146.41.232 ( talk) 22:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
More Caitans then just M'Ress are 'appearing'. One plays a supporting role in one of the many Next Gen 'Time To Whatever' novels. Lots42 ( talk) 21:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I corrected the spelling of Spock's pet, I-Chaya.
Then I went to Wikipedia's page of Recent Changes and didn't see my change. I wonder why not? Thanks. 69.212.38.129 ( talk) 02:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)NotWillDecker
The "is it canon or is it not" issue is still ongoing. Someone added, correctly, that startrek.com now includes TAS in its library. Which is correct. However remembering that the website is run by a department that does not necessarily reflect official opinion, to state that this means it's canon is a violation of WP:NOR. Until Paramount or another body of authority, issues a press release saying "TAS is now canon", then the last official word we have remains that of Roddenberry back in 1991 - it isn't. All that's changed is the ban on TAS references no longer exists. It will be interesting to see if the new movie makes any TAS reference that might serve to canonize it. 68.146.81.123 ( talk) 17:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Surely the first reference to "young Spock being bullied by Vulcan classmates" was in " Journey to Babel" and not in the animated series. Lee M ( talk) 20:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but the section that includes:
"There were also occasional mistakes ... These were typically isolated errors... Occasionally, though, parts of episodes would be animated at a near-theatrical quality level."
Could use a rewrite for consistency, maybe with a citation clarifying just how good or bad or consistent or inconsistent the art was or wasn't. -- Thomas B♘ talk 04:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Article has been tagged for needing sources long-term. Feel free to reinsert the below material with appropriate references. DonIago ( talk) 15:59, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Broadcast history |
---|
==Broadcast history==
Airing on NBC, the series premiered on September 8, 1973 and was broadcast until October 12, 1974, although only twenty-two episodes were produced. The series aired Saturday mornings at 10:30am Eastern/9:30am Central in 1973 and at 11:30am Eastern/10:30am Central the following year. The series was later shown in reruns on Nickelodeon in the 1980s and on the Sci Fi Channel in the 1990s as part of Sci Fi Cartoon Quest. CBS Television Distribution currently holds rights to the series; it is (as of 2014) currently broadcast on Hulu.com and is not broadcast on any linear channel but is currently available via Netflix streaming in the United States (as of March 2015.) In the UK, the series was repeated on BBC2 in the 1990s. As with all Star Trek series, the episodes were subsequently telecast in countries throughout the world, sometimes in American English and other times translated into the respective languages. |
Influence on later Star Trek and Filmation series |
---|
==Influence on later Star Trek and Filmation series==
The USS Enterprise in this series, while supposedly the same ship as from the original series, had a holodeck similar to the one introduced on Star Trek: The Next Generation, which was set about eighty years later. It only appeared once, in Chuck Menville's "The Practical Joker", and was known as the "Rec Room". This feature was originally proposed for the original series (see, e.g., Gerrold, The World of Star Trek) but was never used. Filmation later went on to produce the hit He-Man and the Masters of the Universe (1983–85), which occasionally used modified character and set designs from Star Trek: The Animated Series, mostly as background material. (He-Man and the Masters of the Universe also had several Trek-similar stories, most notably "The Arena", which is similar to Star Trek: The Original Series's first season episode, "Arena"; regular Trek writer D. C. Fontana also penned the second season He-Man episode "Battlecat"). Later series also shared many of the stock sound effects from both Star Trek: The Animated Series and Star Trek: The Original Series. Filmation also recycled some of the background music for Star Trek: The Animated Series in their later shows Shazam!, Tarzan and the Super 7, and Sport Billy. (Some of the music had already been reused from the previous season's The Brady Kids and the Treasure Island feature, and were shared with that season's Lassie's Rescue Rangers). In addition, a few story and character elements that were introduced in the animated series were incorporated into subsequent live-action productions:
|
Production |
---|
==Production==
The series was produced by Filmation, in association with Paramount Television, and ran for two seasons from 1973 to 1974 on NBC, which aired a total of twenty-two half-hour episodes. An early Filmation proposal for this series had children assigned to each of the senior officers as cadets, including a young Vulcan for Mr. Spock. According to interviews with Norm Prescott, Paramount offered Gene Roddenberry a substantial sum of money to abandon creative control of the project and let Filmation proceed with their "kiddy space cadet" idea, but he refused. Filmation would later develop the idea into its own original live action program, Space Academy, in 1977. The writers of the animated series used, essentially, the same writers' guide that was used for the live-action Star Trek: The Original Series. (A copy of the " series bible", as revised for TAS, is held in the science fiction research collection at the Samuel Paley Library, Temple University, Philadelphia.) While the freedom of animation afforded large alien landscapes and believable non-humanoid aliens, budget constraints were a major concern and, as was typical of most Filmation productions, the animation quality was generally only fair, with liberal use of stock shots. There were also occasional mistakes, such as characters appearing on screen who were elsewhere, or a character supposed to appear on the bridge's main viewing screen appearing in front, indicating bad ordering of animation plates. |
Ratings |
---|
===Ratings===
This was Filmation's only show to air for two consecutive seasons on NBC. The other eight shows: ( The Secret Lives of Waldo Kitty, Archie/Sabrina Hour, Young (Space) Sentinels, Fabulous Funnies, Batman & The Super 7, The Kid Super Power Hour with Shazam!, and Sport Billy) lasted one season or less. The New Adventures of Flash Gordon lasted two separate seasons (1979 and 1982). According to the Nielsen ratings, the animated series was not popular enough with young children. According to series' producers it was intended to be enjoyed by the entire family. The series did receive critical acclaim and a Daytime Emmy award, the first such award for the franchise. According to both Roddenberry and an NBC press release, this was the justification for six additional episodes being ordered by the network for the series' second season. |
The intro paragraph states that some episodes were "contributions from well-known science fiction authors." As such, I feel that I must take issue with the last bullet section mentioning "The Magicks of Megas-tu" by a Larry Brody. My research shows that Mr. Brody is NOT a known or well-known science fiction author. He is, however, a known or well-known SCRIPT writer. Just because one writes SF scripts does NOT mean that person is an SF author {"SF author" meaning published in science fiction magazines, anthologies, and/or novels}. Granted, Mr. Brody is published, but NOT as science fiction.
Therefore, I think the bullet section mentioning him should either be removed or replaced. 68.231.83.123 ( talk) 00:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Star Trek: The Animated Series/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
3 images, 16 citations. JJ98 ( Talk) 02:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC) |
Last edited at 10:36, 30 October 2014 (UTC). Substituted at 06:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I currently don't know if this is the first animated Paramount show or not, or if it's really for a young audience. Please respond to this, A.S.A.P., and quick! — Preceding unsigned comment added by XSMan2016 ( talk • contribs) 04:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Star Trek: The Animated Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Apparently an episode of the new animated series "may" make this series "canon". Such claims must be supported by reliable sources. For us to add such statements solely on the basis of our own interpretation is original research. That said, limiting any claims to strictly describing what's shown in the episode is fine; that's no different from a plot summary. Cheers. DonIago ( talk) 00:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
The composer links need to be fixed. They take you to the wrong names. 2600:4040:B683:1400:D42E:C213:B322:7BC1 ( talk) 12:32, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Don't want to edit the article myself, but didn't the S4 Lower Decks episode "Caves" feature Vendorians who were introduced in TAS episode "The Survivor"? Lower Decks is doing such a great job of incorporating past story lines, and as mentioned this kind of makes TAS canon whether officially recognized or not. Probably just an update that hasn't happened yet as the Lower Decks episode is new, but I think we should add it. 67.168.121.181 ( talk) 07:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I removed the below quote because it didn't fit in the section it was in and I wasn't sure of it's relevance to the article as a whole. If it deserves to be in another part that's fine.
Here is the quote taken from "Prodution" at the end of the second paragraph in that section: "Included is the mention of M'Ress being a Caitian. There is also a hand drawn map of Cait's location in the Lynx constellation." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.110.232.104 ( talk) 23:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone cite the original official reason for the series not being continued? - Eyeresist 06:10, 24 October 2006 (UTC) do they really need one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.85.199 ( talk) 12:32, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
Didn't TAS win an Emmy award for best animated series? 23skidoo 05:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Ya, it did. The award was for best children's show actually.. Infact its apparently the only Star Trek to actually win an Emmy. You can see part of the award ceremonty in the extras on the DVD set. 69.225.0.102 21:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
TAS won an Emmy for its short--but very strong--6 episode season from 1973 to 1974. Leoboudv ( talk) 02:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
According to the FASA RPG, the three armed/legged race were called the Edoans. Could be integrated? 81.76.48.80 18:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
Interesting note, in the TAS DVD release, the term "Edosian" gets used throughout the Okuda extras, the video extras, and one of the producers of Enterprise mentions that certain slug-like leeches shown and mentioned in Dr. Phlox's Medical Bay are actually from Arex's planet, "Edoasin Slugs". That the refrence was completely intended. 69.225.0.102 21:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
...I wonder if Star Trek: The Animated Series was the only incarnation to open each episode with the opening credits. Or did it open each episode with the teaser scene before the opening credits? Don-Don 22:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Is there an official statement somewhere somehow about the fact TAS is not canon? Or is that just a long-time urban legend? Gbnogkfs 1 February 2006, 5:50 (UT)
Actually it appears Paramount is changing its stance on the series towards it being canonized again, with how it words things in pack-in booklet, and several articles on paramount. However, with the release of the Animated Series DVD release, studio seems to have changed its stance, and is now calling the animated series part of canon. [2] [3] [4] 69.225.0.102 06:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Personally, as far as the whole canon/non-canon thing goes, I agree with something written in The Agony Booth's review of Mudd's Passion:
No, the real reason I consider TAS canon is that it's a TV show called Star Trek, and it was made with the input of Gene Roddenberry, William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, Deforest Kelley, James Doohan, Nichelle Nichols, George Takei, Majel Barrett-Roddenberry, Walter Koenig, TOS story editor D.C. Fontana, TOS director Marc Daniels, TOS scriptwriters David Gerrold and Stephen Kandel, and TOS guest stars Mark Lenard, Roger C. Carmel, and Stanley Adams. Honestly, if that's not Star Trek, then I don't know what is. It would be tantamount to making an album with performances by John Lennon, Paul McCartney, George Harrison, and Ringo Starr, produced by George Martin, engineered by Norman Smith and Geoff Emerick, with an album cover drawn by Klaus fucking Voorman, and not calling it a Beatles album.
Difficult to argue with that sort of logic. :D - 67.191.254.83 21:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
this was pretty much garbage. I have removed. Some of the references I checked into simply didn't check out at the first time, so I added an actual explanation of the canon status, based on printed reliable sources at the Star Trek: The Animated Series#Canon status section. Having two sections about this, one containing badly sourced information and gives undue weight to a minuscule debate within fandom, and one containing actual information about what writers were and weren't allowed to do). The Spaceflight Chronology does not contain any such text as is attributed to it here. Startrek.com whilst it is an official site, the canon stuff about it editorial opinion, not a pronouncement ex cathedra. etc etc. Stardates mean bugger all in TOS, and its ludicrous to even consider them for dating. There was nothing salvageable in the section. What we might note is that the Voyages of the Imagination timeline puts TAS in 2269-2270 and Okuda doesn't leave any space for it. We can do that in a sentence or maybe two if we were being wordy. Morwen - Talk 20:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
You wrote:
I belive you are referencing the "Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda." The book I am refering to is "*
Star Trek Spaceflight Chronology (Fred & Stan Goldstein, with
Rick Sternbach -- Dec 24, 1979)." This is different book, published before any of the subsequent series had been made.
Jason Palpatine
00:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Ah, interesting. I appear to have a different edition of the Spaceflight Chronology, which doesn't have a page 180. Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention, I shall see what I can do to source it. Nontheless, the section is still godawful and improperly sourced in many many other ways and you should revert yourself forthwith to remove it againI have removed it again. A list of things that the article claims now that are not correct:
Please check our policies about WP:V and WP:NOR. I removed this section for good reasons, and superficially adding sources doesn't fix its fundamental brokenness.
I replaced the section with the one at Star Trek: The Animated Series#Canon issues, so additionally, having 2 sections, both talking about whether TAS is canon or not, and where it is dated, is pretty non-optimal. If there are any specific points in the text deleted that you think can be adequately sourced to Wikipedia standards then please feel free to put these in this section, with appropriate wording : or maybe point out things to me and I will do them. but please don't revert this big wodge of text back there. Morwen - Talk 22:46, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I bought the Official Star Trek 30th Anniversary book because it had an image from ST:TAS on the cover. Inside it had one more small image and a mere one or two paragraphs on the series. I'd have to dig it out of storage to check, but I don't recall the book having an episode list for ST:TAS. If someone else has this book and could verify how little text there is and whether or not the book lists the episodes, then this abominable slight towards this series can be added to this article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.136.145.239 ( talk) 06:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC).
Why didn't they use the theme song from TOS? Were their copyright/legal reasons that they had to use an altered theme song? Or, did they feel that a slightly different theme song would give the animated series a fresh new feel? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.65.69.43 ( talk • contribs) 17:32, Jun 30, 2007 (UTC).
It would be very helpful to know why the original theme wasn't used. Perhaps also due to budget constraints to license the original work? I wonder if Courage was approached. Unfortunately, the TAS theme is a poor imitation of the signature music. St.Mark'sPizza ( talk) 14:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Where did this statement come from - that the Kzinti were to have appeared in the fifth season of Enterprise? Unless someone can find a source for that, I think it should be removed as speculative. 68.146.41.232 ( talk) 22:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
More Caitans then just M'Ress are 'appearing'. One plays a supporting role in one of the many Next Gen 'Time To Whatever' novels. Lots42 ( talk) 21:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I corrected the spelling of Spock's pet, I-Chaya.
Then I went to Wikipedia's page of Recent Changes and didn't see my change. I wonder why not? Thanks. 69.212.38.129 ( talk) 02:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)NotWillDecker
The "is it canon or is it not" issue is still ongoing. Someone added, correctly, that startrek.com now includes TAS in its library. Which is correct. However remembering that the website is run by a department that does not necessarily reflect official opinion, to state that this means it's canon is a violation of WP:NOR. Until Paramount or another body of authority, issues a press release saying "TAS is now canon", then the last official word we have remains that of Roddenberry back in 1991 - it isn't. All that's changed is the ban on TAS references no longer exists. It will be interesting to see if the new movie makes any TAS reference that might serve to canonize it. 68.146.81.123 ( talk) 17:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Surely the first reference to "young Spock being bullied by Vulcan classmates" was in " Journey to Babel" and not in the animated series. Lee M ( talk) 20:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but the section that includes:
"There were also occasional mistakes ... These were typically isolated errors... Occasionally, though, parts of episodes would be animated at a near-theatrical quality level."
Could use a rewrite for consistency, maybe with a citation clarifying just how good or bad or consistent or inconsistent the art was or wasn't. -- Thomas B♘ talk 04:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Article has been tagged for needing sources long-term. Feel free to reinsert the below material with appropriate references. DonIago ( talk) 15:59, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
Broadcast history |
---|
==Broadcast history==
Airing on NBC, the series premiered on September 8, 1973 and was broadcast until October 12, 1974, although only twenty-two episodes were produced. The series aired Saturday mornings at 10:30am Eastern/9:30am Central in 1973 and at 11:30am Eastern/10:30am Central the following year. The series was later shown in reruns on Nickelodeon in the 1980s and on the Sci Fi Channel in the 1990s as part of Sci Fi Cartoon Quest. CBS Television Distribution currently holds rights to the series; it is (as of 2014) currently broadcast on Hulu.com and is not broadcast on any linear channel but is currently available via Netflix streaming in the United States (as of March 2015.) In the UK, the series was repeated on BBC2 in the 1990s. As with all Star Trek series, the episodes were subsequently telecast in countries throughout the world, sometimes in American English and other times translated into the respective languages. |
Influence on later Star Trek and Filmation series |
---|
==Influence on later Star Trek and Filmation series==
The USS Enterprise in this series, while supposedly the same ship as from the original series, had a holodeck similar to the one introduced on Star Trek: The Next Generation, which was set about eighty years later. It only appeared once, in Chuck Menville's "The Practical Joker", and was known as the "Rec Room". This feature was originally proposed for the original series (see, e.g., Gerrold, The World of Star Trek) but was never used. Filmation later went on to produce the hit He-Man and the Masters of the Universe (1983–85), which occasionally used modified character and set designs from Star Trek: The Animated Series, mostly as background material. (He-Man and the Masters of the Universe also had several Trek-similar stories, most notably "The Arena", which is similar to Star Trek: The Original Series's first season episode, "Arena"; regular Trek writer D. C. Fontana also penned the second season He-Man episode "Battlecat"). Later series also shared many of the stock sound effects from both Star Trek: The Animated Series and Star Trek: The Original Series. Filmation also recycled some of the background music for Star Trek: The Animated Series in their later shows Shazam!, Tarzan and the Super 7, and Sport Billy. (Some of the music had already been reused from the previous season's The Brady Kids and the Treasure Island feature, and were shared with that season's Lassie's Rescue Rangers). In addition, a few story and character elements that were introduced in the animated series were incorporated into subsequent live-action productions:
|
Production |
---|
==Production==
The series was produced by Filmation, in association with Paramount Television, and ran for two seasons from 1973 to 1974 on NBC, which aired a total of twenty-two half-hour episodes. An early Filmation proposal for this series had children assigned to each of the senior officers as cadets, including a young Vulcan for Mr. Spock. According to interviews with Norm Prescott, Paramount offered Gene Roddenberry a substantial sum of money to abandon creative control of the project and let Filmation proceed with their "kiddy space cadet" idea, but he refused. Filmation would later develop the idea into its own original live action program, Space Academy, in 1977. The writers of the animated series used, essentially, the same writers' guide that was used for the live-action Star Trek: The Original Series. (A copy of the " series bible", as revised for TAS, is held in the science fiction research collection at the Samuel Paley Library, Temple University, Philadelphia.) While the freedom of animation afforded large alien landscapes and believable non-humanoid aliens, budget constraints were a major concern and, as was typical of most Filmation productions, the animation quality was generally only fair, with liberal use of stock shots. There were also occasional mistakes, such as characters appearing on screen who were elsewhere, or a character supposed to appear on the bridge's main viewing screen appearing in front, indicating bad ordering of animation plates. |
Ratings |
---|
===Ratings===
This was Filmation's only show to air for two consecutive seasons on NBC. The other eight shows: ( The Secret Lives of Waldo Kitty, Archie/Sabrina Hour, Young (Space) Sentinels, Fabulous Funnies, Batman & The Super 7, The Kid Super Power Hour with Shazam!, and Sport Billy) lasted one season or less. The New Adventures of Flash Gordon lasted two separate seasons (1979 and 1982). According to the Nielsen ratings, the animated series was not popular enough with young children. According to series' producers it was intended to be enjoyed by the entire family. The series did receive critical acclaim and a Daytime Emmy award, the first such award for the franchise. According to both Roddenberry and an NBC press release, this was the justification for six additional episodes being ordered by the network for the series' second season. |
The intro paragraph states that some episodes were "contributions from well-known science fiction authors." As such, I feel that I must take issue with the last bullet section mentioning "The Magicks of Megas-tu" by a Larry Brody. My research shows that Mr. Brody is NOT a known or well-known science fiction author. He is, however, a known or well-known SCRIPT writer. Just because one writes SF scripts does NOT mean that person is an SF author {"SF author" meaning published in science fiction magazines, anthologies, and/or novels}. Granted, Mr. Brody is published, but NOT as science fiction.
Therefore, I think the bullet section mentioning him should either be removed or replaced. 68.231.83.123 ( talk) 00:17, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Star Trek: The Animated Series/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
3 images, 16 citations. JJ98 ( Talk) 02:24, 3 March 2014 (UTC) |
Last edited at 10:36, 30 October 2014 (UTC). Substituted at 06:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I currently don't know if this is the first animated Paramount show or not, or if it's really for a young audience. Please respond to this, A.S.A.P., and quick! — Preceding unsigned comment added by XSMan2016 ( talk • contribs) 04:25, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Star Trek: The Animated Series. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Apparently an episode of the new animated series "may" make this series "canon". Such claims must be supported by reliable sources. For us to add such statements solely on the basis of our own interpretation is original research. That said, limiting any claims to strictly describing what's shown in the episode is fine; that's no different from a plot summary. Cheers. DonIago ( talk) 00:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
The composer links need to be fixed. They take you to the wrong names. 2600:4040:B683:1400:D42E:C213:B322:7BC1 ( talk) 12:32, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Don't want to edit the article myself, but didn't the S4 Lower Decks episode "Caves" feature Vendorians who were introduced in TAS episode "The Survivor"? Lower Decks is doing such a great job of incorporating past story lines, and as mentioned this kind of makes TAS canon whether officially recognized or not. Probably just an update that hasn't happened yet as the Lower Decks episode is new, but I think we should add it. 67.168.121.181 ( talk) 07:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)