T V, Or Not T V, Is That the Question?
The ABC Sunday Night Movie for February 24, 1985 marked the US commercial network television premiere of the second Star Trek feature. That film, The Wrath of Khan, had been released theatrically almost three years earlier (and then on pay cable) but this was the first “broadcast” the film ever got, and probably the largest single audience the film ever had.
But have you heard the rumor that this triumphant sequel was originally conceived as a humble TV movie of the week?
And, whether you’ve heard this or not or believe it or not, we always have to ask: Is it true?
Garbled Communications
At the center of the confusion is whether or not Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) was ever intended to be a TV movie-of-the-week (that is, a movie made for television)—and if it was, when the decision was made to distribute the film theatrically instead. Take, for example, these comments from author Mark A. Altman, appearing in “The Genesis Effect: Engineering The Wrath of Khan,” a home video bonus feature released in 2016:
Now a lot of people misunderstand. They think that Star Trek was going to become a TV movie, and that Star Trek II turned out so well, they decided to release it as a movie. That is not true. It was always going to be a feature, but developed by the TV division.[1]
But where does the perception that the movie was made-for-TV come from?
Project Genesis
It was Starlog Magazine’s May 1981 issue (which would have hit newsstands and mailboxes in April) which gave many fans the notion that the film was planned to be a TV movie. It reported:
[...]Paramount has admitted that if the TV-movie is good enough, it could be released theatrically instead of being broadcast on the tube (as was done with Universal's Buck Rogers pilot).
Trek’s supposed TV movie return as reported in Starlog Magazine.
Another source for this notion was Gene Roddenberry. A few weeks after the Starlog article, in mid-May of 1981, the Star Trek creator was telling the press that the film’s release strategy would depend on how well the film turned out:
A new “Star Trek” TV series is unlikely, said Roddenberry. “The route now is to two-hour movies. Paramount has one in the works. But whether for TV or theaters depends on how it comes out.”[2]
Privately, Roddenberry—who had been demoted to serving as “executive consultant” on the project after producing the first movie—had already expressed concerns over how the film would turn out. Just a month earlier, after reading the April 10, 1981 draft of the screenplay by Jack B. Sowards and Harve Bennett, then titled “The Genesis Project,” he had written a “personal and confidential” memo to Paramount TV executive Gary Nardino, where he expressed grave concerns about the current state of the project:
The difficulty in this letter is that I have gotten to know Harve Bennett during this project and have begun to like him very much. It is clear to me that he wants very much to do a good and even a proud job on STAR TREK and he has worked very hard at this assignment. It is, therefore, painful to me to have to face the fact that he and his writer have come up with a “final draft” script that is not only bad but actually downright embarrassing. I fear this story and script may not even be salvageable -- the basic unbelievability in the story premises and in the motivations of the key characters permeates the script.[3]
A few months later, other press outlets began running with the story that Paramount hadn’t settled on a release strategy for the film. In an article that ran in Weekly Variety on September 9, 1981, for example, the trade paper indicated that plans for the movie were still in a state of flux only two months before filming would begin:
Paramount will release the project theatrically abroad, but has decided to take a “wait and see posture” domestically. At one point, it had been planned as a two-hour telefilm and later anticipated as a feature. Word is creative personnel are receiving salaries “commensurate with a feature film.”[4]
There were similar reports in several other newspapers over the next few weeks, such as this one published in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette on September 17, 1981:
There will be a “Star Trek II,” but Paramount isn’t sure if it will go to TV or theaters...It will be released theatrically overseas, but Paramount won’t decide on the U.S. release until the film is completed.[5]
Operation: Obfuscate!
Paramount was apparently unhappy about these reports (unsurprising, since the implication was the studio had a lack of confidence in the project). When they issued a press release on September 18, 1981 announcing the start of production, studio head Michael Eisner took the opportunity to deny that releasing the film as a movie-of-the-week had ever been considered:
“Contrary to all the unconfirmed reports and the inevitable speculation about this project, ‘STAR TREK II’ has always been intended as a full-length motion picture for release in the United States and Canada as well as in the international territories,” Mr. Eisner commented.[6]
But Eisner’s blunt public assertion was contradicted internally eleven days later in a memo from Paramount Executive Bob Rosenbaum to Gary Nardino dated September 29, 1981, which indicates that the project had, in fact, been conceived as a TV movie and budgeted as such only five months before the start of principal photography (which began on November 9, 1981):
On June 9, 1981 Television Production put out a budget based on a script written by Jack B. Sowards and Harve Bennett dated April 10, 1981. This budget was considered as a two-hour movie of the week to be made in thirty-five (35) days and to be shot and staffed in a television manner. It was budgeted at $4,914,786 excluding optical work. According to business affairs, if this script was to be released as a theatrical motion picture, there would be an additional cost of $667,018 to be added (as noted on the top sheet.)Since the existence of this script there have been various meetings which resulted in an extensive rewrite by Harve Bennett, Jack B. Sowards and Samuel A. Peeples as well as much creative imput [sic] by Nicholas Meyer, our director. This script dated September 16, 1981 grew considerably from its former concept and after discussions with management, and the main cast, revisions were made. A final draft dated September 25, 1981 has just come out. We are in the process of scheduling and budgeting this final script.[7]
Estimates of “above the line” costs that would escalate if the TV Movie Of the Week (M.O.W.) were instead produced as a feature film.
It was only sometime after June 9, 1981 that plans changed and it was decided to release the movie in theaters (at this time, we do not have access to the paperwork that might help us pinpoint the exact date this decision was made). According to Rosenbaum’s memo, the budget was being adjusted to accommodate all the extra costs of a feature film:
Management's decision to go theatrical and anamorphic has changed some things. Detail on the large screen is much more obvious than were it to be on television. Set construction, set dressing, special effects, wardrobe and, of course, special optical effects have to be much more sophisticated. This along with crews to be hired knowing that this is now a major motion picture (as was so announced) and who will not work for less than feature money have made this first budget escalate.[8]
In other words, by the time the cameras were rolling, there was no doubt that the movie would be exhibited theatrically. Any rumors that Paramount did not make the decision to upgrade the film to theatrical release status until after seeing it have been greatly exaggerated.
TV, But Not TV
Nevertheless, the film was produced under the auspices of Paramount’s TV division, as a way of curbing costs after the runaway production of Star Trek—The Motion Picture (1979) had gone disastrously over budget. This led to some (possibly baseless) speculation in the press about the studio’s intentions:
Interestingly “Star Trek II” will be made under the supervision of Paramount’s television division which means it will likely be tested theatrically and then sold to cable TV if the market is soft. It will be sold for theatrical release abroad.[9]
Consequently, this also led to further denials by Paramount that the movie was headed towards anything but a theatrical release, such as these remarks that were printed in The Baltimore Sun on October 11, 1981:
Gordon Weaver, a spokesman for the studio, scotched one rumor that the sequel was destined for television. He said it would be released to theaters next summer.[10]
"He Stars as a Salesman of Shows to the Networks: Gary Nardino - Star TV Salesman," Aljean Harmetz, New York Times, June 27, 1982, p.78.
The TV movie origins are further underscored by the fact that Gary Nardino, who received the budget memo excerpted in this piece, was President of Production for the TV division when Star Trek II was produced. From 1977 until 1983, he supervised many TV movies, miniseries, and weekly television series—including the unmade series called Star Trek II (popularly misidentified as Star Trek: Phase II) developed for the aborted Paramount Television Service.[11] However, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was the only theatrical film he was involved with during his tenure at Paramount. (Following his departure from Paramount Television, he was the executive producer of Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984), but he mostly returned to television thereafter. Nardino died in 1998.)[12]
By mid-October 1981, the press seems to have gotten the message. A story that ran in the Wall Street Journal on October 9, 1981, for example, speculated on the effect Spock’s demise would have on the movie’s domestic box office.[13] The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette’s “Tattler” column, which previously claimed the movie might head to television, reported on November 25, 1981 that “Paramount is seeking bids in major cities for its premiere. Trekkies should circle June 4, 1982, on their calendars.”[14]
—30—
NOTE: We previously wrote about this question as part of “20 Things You Didn't Know About Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan (1982)” for What Culture. You can read that piece from the beginning here or go directly to the slide about the movie’s TV movie origins here.
Revision Notes
2021-02-25 — Original post
2024-02-03 — Corrected the ABC Sunday Night Movie date for The Wrath of Khan to February 24, 1985. Previously it was erroneously listed as the 25th.
End Notes & Sources
[1] "The Genesis Effect: Engineering The Wrath of Khan," Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan [documentary extra, Blu-ray] Prod. Roger Lay Jr., Denise Okuda, Michael Okuda, Paramount Home Video, United States, 2016, 29 mins.
[2] Bettelou Peterson, “‘Star Trek’ Fantasy Merges With Reality,” The Hartford Courant, May 17, 1981, Page YY4
[3] Memo from Gene Roddenberry to Gary Nardino, April 17, 1981, released by The Trek Files podcast (Roddenberry Entertainment).
[4] “Nicholas Meyer Directs ‘Star Trek II’ For Par; TV For US.; Screen O’Seas,” Weekly Variety, September 9, 1981, Page 4.
[5] George Anderson, “Triangle Tattler: ‘Star Trek’ sequel might be released on TV,’ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 17, 1981, Page 20
[6] Paramount Pictures Press Release, September 18, 1981, Nicholas Meyer Papers, University of Iowa Special Collections.
[7] Memo From Bob Rosenbaum to Gary Nardino, September 29, 1981, Nicholas Meyer Papers, University of Iowa Special Collections.
[8] Memo From Bob Rosenbaum to Gary Nardino, September 29, 1981, Nicholas Meyer Papers, University of Iowa Special Collections.
[9] “Paramount Signs Director For Second Star Trek Film,” The Sacramento Bee, October 6, 1981, Page 36.
[10] Desmond Ryan, “‘Star Trek II,’ starring Shatner and Nimoy, is blasting Off,” The Baltimore Sun, October 11, 1981, page D18
[11] Edward Gross, Trek: The Lost Years (1989), Pages 45-58; Memo from Gene Roddenberry to Gary Nardino, September 15, 1977, released by The Trek Files podcast (Roddenberry Entertainment).
[12] Nick Madigan, “Gary Nardino dead at 62,” Variety (online), February 1, 1998, https://variety.com/1998/biz/news/gary-nardino-dead-at-62-1117467318/ A quote:
“He [Nardino] ran Paramount when Paramount was by a large measure the No. 1 TV studio in town,” said CBS Television president Leslie Moonves, who for years attended Nardino’s lavishly catered Thursday night poker games. “He was larger than life in more ways than one. He was a showman, and he enjoyed all the trappings of being a top TV executive. He was a major figure in our industry and he affected the lives of a lot of people.”
[13] Stephen J. Sansweet, “Does Mr. Spock Die In the Next Episode Of ‘Star Trek’ Saga?” Wall Street Journal, October 9, 1981, Page 1.
[14] George Anderson, “The Tattler: Fonda deserves an Oscar for ‘On Golden Pond,’ Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, November 25, 1981, Page 20.
Gary Nardino