Is There In Truth No Beauty?

Filmed July 1968

My return to STAR TREK early in their third season found more changes. Producer John Meredyth Lucas was gone, replaced by Fred Freiberger. Director of photography Jerry Finnerman was still there but on his final assignments; the studio had released him from his contract, and he he was leaving the series to photograph a feature film. Paramount was still next door, even closer now because the wall that had separated the two studios, Paramount and Desilu (originally RKO Radio Pictures), had been torn down. I sensed a tense atmosphere in the company almost at once.

There were no locations required to film this episode. In fact the entire show would be filmed in the Enterprise set on Stage 9 except for one four page scene in a herbarium set on adjacent swing Stage 8. Casting was half easy. For the role of Larry Marvick, the tortured soul in love with Miranda, I wanted David Frankham. I had directed David twice before — first on the main stage of the Pasadena Playhouse in a production of Somerset Maugham’s THE CIRCLE and later in the episode THE TRAP on TWELVE O’CLOCK HIGH. My request was greeted with approval. The other half, the role of Miranda, was more difficult. We checked out Jessica Walter, but she was not available. Other availabilities were checked with no success. Now STAR TREK had a standing rule that guest stars could not repeat unless they were coming back to play the same role. At this point I daringly suggested we bring back Diana Muldaur (who had guest starred the previous season in RETURN TO TOMORROW, about which the less said the better) and that we put her in a black wig. That suggestion was finally accepted.

Our first day of filming, Tuesday, July 16th, arrived, and I was greeted with a mutiny on the Enterprise. Bill Shatner and Leonard Nimoy had very strong objections to a portion of the scene we were scheduled to do that day and were refusing to film. Since the objection was to dialogue involving a piece of jewelry that Gene Roddenberry had designed, he was summoned to the set. (I have since learned that Leonard Nimoy first phoned producer Fred Freiberger to tell him of the problem. When Freiberger refused to take any action, Leonard called Roddenberry.) The morning was spent in a round table war with the six characters involved in the scene plus Gene and me. But the battle was strictly Bill and Leonard vs Gene. Bill and Leonard felt Gene was using the scene as a promotional commercial for a pin he had designed; the pin was part of Leonard’s costume. Gene vehemently denied these accusations, but the guys were adamant in their refusal to be a part of something they considered to be commercially oriented. The final result of the long morning’s angry combat was that Gene agreed to rewrite the scene. That meant it could not be filmed that day. The balance of work on that first day’s schedule was four short sequences (that totaled a page and a half) in the Enterprise corridor. I did not want my first day’s work to be limited to a page and a half of what I called “bread and butter” scenes, so I suggested we do a dramatic three page scene between Diana Muldaur and David Frankham. Which is what we did. I will discuss these scenes later as I reach them in the progress of our story.

The script was very positive in stating the ground rules for who should be allowed in the presence of the arriving Ambassador, and we were very careful that this exposition be presented clearly. So now let me take you to the Transporter Room and let the story begin.

I would have preferred filming the scene of Spock and Dr. Miranda Jones escorting the Ambassador to his quarters in a single dolly back two shot. But the corridor set was not long enough, so we filmed a dolly medium shot of Spock speaking to Dr. Jones (who was off camera) as he moved the length of the corridor. Since that was not sufficient to complete his dialogue, we then moved Spock and the camera back to the starting position and moving through the same stretch of corridor, we continued the scene. I’m not sure, but I think we may even have had to do a third run. We then did the same thing with Dr. Jones, filming her moving medium shot speaking to Spock, who was off camera. In the editing room by intercutting Spock and Dr. Jones we gave the illusion of the two of them moving through a longer corridor than the one that existed.

Things would happen on this episode in postproduction that I had not faced before. The script in Scene 22 again was very definite, this time describing Spock’s meeting the Ambassador.

And now the scene.

Due to ensuing circumstances that occurred after I turned in my director’s cut, I did not view the final master print until the night the show aired. When I saw this scene, I was appalled. Who had ordered the horror film flickering green light and the comic strip animation that was inserted to represent the ugliness of the Ambassador? I had my suspicions, since that kind of vulgarizing technique had never intruded into STAR TREK before. My objection was that its insertion negated the true intent of the scene, which was to show Spock’s reverent reaction to meeting the Ambassador, an esteemed person, not a monster. After Spock left, there was an even greater distortion. The script called for Miranda to look at the CLOSED receptacle as she said, “What is it he sees when he looks at you? I must know.” The unscripted addition of a shot of the receptacle opening with a repeat of the animation was outrageous and tasteless.

The portion of the dining scene that caused so much consternation that first day was rewritten by Gene Roddenberry. The business with the IDIC pin that Spock wears had been drastically trimmed so that all could dine (and act) at ease.

Again the script was very clear. Having established that Miranda had telepathic abilities, she was suddenly aware of the presence of thoughts of murder.

And now the scene.

Further reason for me to be distressed: the superimposition of the Ambassador’s receptacle was WRONG! Miranda was reading by her telepathic ability the thought of murder. Who in the group was thinking that thought? The Ambassador had no seat at that table!

I have always said, METAMORPHOSIS was my favorite of the STAR TREK episodes I directed. I felt there was a mysterious and poetic dimension to the science fiction. I saw some of that same element in this script. Jerry Finnerman certainly rose to that challenge in his photography. And the scene between Miranda and Larry that we substituted on the schedule that first day was a good example of why in my preparation, I liked to have more than just the intended day’s schedule prepared; and why I liked working with actors who were prepared when unexpectedly they were asked to do scenes that were not scheduled. Filming I found usually followed the lines of Murphy’s Law: If something can go wrong, it will.

Again the superimposition of the Ambassador’s receptacle is WRONG! Miranda’s next line was, “So it’s you. Who do you want to kill, Larry? Is it me?” The Ambassador at this point does not figure in the equation.

The next day at dailies, following this scene Bobby Justman was heard to remark, “I wonder how she’ll look in a red wig.”

I decided I wanted to use the fish-eye 9mm lens again, the lens Jerry Finnerman introduced me to on METAMORPHOSIS, but this time I wanted to use it differently. Before it was used to give a greater expanse to a very small area; this time I wanted it to be the distorted point of view of a mad man.

In a five hour taped interview in 2002, Jerry Finnerman said, “Directors of Photography create the mood of the show. They create the dimension. They tell a story with their lights.” That had been true in all of our STAR TREK collaborations, especially THIS SIDE OF PARADISE, METAMORPHOSIS and OBSESSION. And it was most emphatically true of his work on this episode.

IS THERE IN TRUTH NO BEAUTY? was the third time Diana Muldaur and I worked together; there would be two future collaborations. I think Dr. Miranda Jones was the most rewarding of our associations. I liked directing women, but the television industry of the sixties and seventies did not offer women the kind of roles that the movies had in the thirties and forties. Or the kind of roles that live television had provided in the fifties. Early sixties shows like DR. KILDARE, ROUTE 66, NAKED CITY, BEN CASEY had continued that trend, but by the seventies action had relegated women to secondary supporting assignments. That’s why STAR TREK was so unusual. Four of the seven STAR TREK’s I directed had strong leading roles for women. And it also had in Jerry Finnerman a director of photography who knew how to photograph women..

Gene Roddenberry, in his conception of the character of Spock, and Leonard Nimoy, in his total realization of that character, had boxed in an enormously versatile actor. Earlier in THIS SIDE OF PARADISE Spock was freed emotionally by the spores, and Leonard was able to use his talent far beyond the constraints of Spock’s character. The mind link was another route to that same freedom.

As I wrote, I was disturbed by the animation supposedly representing the Ambassador’s ugliness. I was grateful however that whoever made that erroneous decision was very inconsistent. How come when Spock opened the Ambassador’s vessel in this sequence, there was no animation? As you will now see it couldn’t have been because the Ambassador was no longer ugly.

Television too seldom allowed scenes that exploded emotionally. The excitement too often provided was generated by car chases and fights. But occasionally a script would provide that excitement by the conflict between the characters. You saw it earlier in the death of Larry Marvick. Now Kirk and Miranda go at it.

I have to confess, I’m getting bored with the repetition of this topic. Why the animation?

Finally the last scene of the film. Was it possible there would be no further reasons to cause me anguish? What could possibly be done in postproduction to a simple scene in the Transporter Room?

Did you catch the gross error? The script and my director’s cut had Kirk say, “Peace”, and then he exited. Who decided to have him hang around, without a visor, which wouldn’t have protected him anyway because he was human? I have run out of scorn!

I think friendships in show business are different than in any other profession. Very close ones can evolve in a very short period of time. But the profession also separates people who have become friends and for long periods of time. I have found that when reunions occur, the friendships pick up right where they left off. David Frankham and I first met and worked together 50 years ago. I had not seen him for 22 years when he recently came to visit. And as I said, the bonds of friendship did not recognize that long period of separation. While he visited, we watched IS THERE IN TRUTH NO BEAUTY? on a big screen. Photographs were taken of David viewing his performance.

The second photograph to me is very surreal. David is looking at his performance on the screen. But Larry Marvik seems to be thinking, “Why is that old codger staring at me?” Much like the Jeff Daniels character in Woody Allen’s THE PURPLE ROSE OF CAIRO, this character on the screen seems to be aware of the one watching him.

I have a joke I have told for years.

As I sat alone in my room, sad and lonely and without a friend, a voice came to me from out of the gloom and said, “Cheer up. Things could be worse.” So I cheered up — and sure enough — things got worse.

That little joke can serve as a preview for my next voyage on the Enterprise!

The journey continues