[net.startrek] Why Shatner and not Hunter?

ccrdave@ucdavis.UUCP (Lord Kahless @ Imperial Propoganda) (03/08/86)

> And why did they replace Hunter with Shatner?  Was it supposed to be
> that way all along?  Didn't they like Hunter?
> 
> | UUCP:  ...!watmath!watdcsu!atoy     BITNET: atoy at watdcsu     |

Jeff Hunter was off on another project when the call came for
the second pilot, so he was unavailable.  He died not too long
after that, so he never came back.  That's how they got away
w/ calling the first pilot seventeen years earlier.  (nobody
was the same except the ship, so it was long ago.)

I'd like to open a REAL can of worms here.  Given NOTHING besides
the first two pilots, which captain was better, Pike or Kirk?
Hunter was better looking and appeared in much better physical shape.
He didn't overact, and seemed to project both loneliness and energy
well.

			{dual,lll-crg,ucbvax}!ucdavis!vega!ccrdave
	+-----------------------------------------------------------+
	| 	     "I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. |
	| Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched |
	| C-Beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All |
	| those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.   |
	| Time to die."  -- Roy Baty, Nexus6, N6MAA10816, Combat    |
	+-----------------------------------------------------------+

ix312@sdcc6.UUCP (ix312) (03/11/86)

> I'd like to open a REAL can of worms here.  Given NOTHING besides
> the first two pilots, which captain was better, Pike or Kirk?
> Hunter was better looking and appeared in much better physical shape.
> He didn't overact, and seemed to project both loneliness and energy
> well.
> 
 I choose Hunter for the above reasons.