<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[&quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Star Trek</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>grizzledgeezer</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 11:49 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">When Harlan Ellison published the original version of "City" in the late '90s, I eagerly purchased an autographed copy. Reading it, I discovered its many problems. It had only taken 30 years to recognize them!<br />
I sent a note to Ellison's publisher. He called several weeks later, politely thanking me for writing. We spoke all of 30 seconds.<br />
"City" is not a drama but a melodrama, and it contains many logical and factual errors. You have no right to say I don't know what I'm talking about, unless you have a basic grasp of what good storytelling is about.<br />
Interestingly, David Gerrold talks about these very things in<br />
The World of Star Trek<br />
, where he really rips into the series. Even someone as arrogant as Gene Roddenberry incorporated at least one of his ideas in<br />
TNG<br />
.<br />
Now Anyone who cares may request a copy of my rewrite. You'll see how to tell a much better story by paying attention to character motivation and logic. Are you afraid that I know more about writing teleplays (this one, anyway) than Harlan Ellison? (My writing has been complimented by John Crye and Tom Skerritt.)</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/181639/city-on-the-edge-of-forever-great-idea-poor-execution</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 May 2026 12:55:06 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/181639.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:15 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:29 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>grizzledgeezer</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 04, 2016 05:42 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Give me your address so I can send my rewrite.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525245</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525245</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:29 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:27 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>Blueghost</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 11:32 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Let's see you do better.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525244</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525244</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:27 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:26 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>WyldeGoose</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 03, 2016 06:58 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">But, unless we see that change of mind of Spock, which is rather important, it didn't happen.  I saw Kirk saving Keeler on the staircase as a normal reaction by anyone with a conscience.<br />
Now, I want to say that my beef detracts from the episode at all.  Given what I know about what went on behind the scenes, it's rather amazing this episode got aired at all (Harlan Ellison's own attitude didn't help matters).  I still love this episode and I think it's great; but I can see the missed opportunity here.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525243</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525243</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:26 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:25 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>timmytony80</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 10:27 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">WYLDE GOOSE; Kirk was thinking about saving Edith, the staircase.  Spoke must have changed his mind (back) at some point.  They were there 4 3 weeks!</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525242</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525242</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:25 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:24 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>WyldeGoose</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 04, 2016 07:11 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">That's basically correct. Edith had to die  but in my version, her death comes about differently.<br />
There are two themes to approach this with.  I think what Ellison was trying to avoid was the Inevitability of History theme, which is that certain things in history are unavoidable.  One of the reasons why I cringe at Spectre of the Gun is in the beginning of the Melkotian simulation, Spock is saying that history cannot be altered.  But the mere fact that they have to go back in time to correct something Bones did indicates that history can be changed, so the Inevitability angle can't be used.  I think Ellison was deliberately attempting to put a serious conflict between Kirk and Spock, something that they would, over time, have to get over, which is what Gene objected to (and mind you I don't necessarily disagree with that, given the episodic nature of the series).<br />
I wouldn't mind seeing what you'd have come up with.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525241</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525241</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:24 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:23 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>grizzledgeezer</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 04, 2016 06:14 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">That's basically correct. Edith had to die  but in my version, her death comes about differently.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525240</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525240</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:23 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:23 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>kerryedavis</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 07:52 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I would argue that if Edith Keeler died originally, then she had to die to restore the timeline as the Guardian stated.  Anything else would be "playing dice with the future" so to speak.  And for that matter, the Guardian might not have even let them return if they did anything else.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525239</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525239</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:23 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:22 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>WyldeGoose</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 06:36 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I knew about the flaws in this episode from the start, and it took Ellison's novel to confirm them for me.  What Ellison wanted was a real conflict between the characters, and Gene fought him at every turn on that.  I could see that he tried to sneak the beginnings of this in the episode, but we all know what happens in the end.<br />
My biggest beef with this episode, which Ellison did try to address, was Spock's interpretation of events.  It is he, alone, that determines that Edith Keeler should die, based on what he was able to record from the Guardian of Forever.  But I would counter that by having both him and Kirk then travel into the portal sometime after Bones that history is theirs to write as they see fit.  He only sees a glimpse of what may be, and concludes that it could only be Keeler who is so influential that she prevents America's involvement in WWII.  While there have been people who have been that influential, they are incredibly rare, and they often have a great deal of help in the process.  Granted, it's television, and they only have so much time to tell a story, but this is what really should've been the big point of contention between Kirk and Spock, and something that Kirk should've held a grudge over Spock for, to allow Keeler to die by being hit by a car, when it's just as possible to allow her to live, to tell her that some things need to happen and they happen for a reason that do not make any sense at the time, horrible as it is.  This is the kind of thing that should've caused a rift that would take years to repair.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525238</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525238</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:22 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:21 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>alanr4447a</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 11:34 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Je sais bien:<br />
Awkwardness.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525237</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525237</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:21 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:20 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>timmytony80</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 10:22 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">ALAAN 4447 A; Not even.  FOREVER gives the title that, je ne sais quoi.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525236</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525236</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:20 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:19 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>alanr4447a</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 06:04 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">aroused some interest: piqued<br />
bringing to high levels: peaked<br />
giving you a glimpse: peeked<br />
I welcome serious criticism.<br />
KIRK:<br />
Serious? Serious, Bones? It upsets the whole percentage.<br />
("A Piece of the Action")<br />
Well, start by changing the title to "The City on the Edge of Eternity". It refers to the same concept without the atrocious grammar.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525235</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525235</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:19 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:18 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>grizzledgeezer</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 03:54 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Yes, please do so. I welcome serious criticism.<br />
"Piqued" (sharpened, as in pico (beak)) is the usual word.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525234</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525234</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:18 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:17 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>kerryedavis</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 02:40 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Good for you, taking one for the team!</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525233</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525233</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:17 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to &quot;City on the Edge of Forever&quot; – great idea, poor execution on Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:16 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>alanr4447a</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 02, 2016 02:13 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">This does arouse some interest in seeing what you're talking about, even bringing to high levels, and giving you a glimpse of my reaction to your discourse. In other words, you've piqued/peaked/peeked my curiosity.<br />
So I would be interested in seeing it. Shall I PM you my email address?</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525232</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1525232</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:15:16 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>