ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

IF GENE RODDENBERRY HAD SEEN STAR TREK XI

kanig8

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1120

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 2:36 am

Hello everyone!

What do you think would have been Gene Roddenberry's opinion of STAR TREK XI, if he had still been alive to see it?

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 3:33 am

A truly impossible question to answer.

Captain_Storma

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 11836

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 10:00 am

Have to agree with WkdYngMan here :p

DS9TREK

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14322

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 2:05 pm

He moaned about ST:II cos he wasn't involved, he moaned about ST:III cos he wasn't involved, he moaned about ST:IV cos he wasn't involved, he moaned about ST:V cos he wasn't involved and... he moaned about ST:VI cos he wasn't involved.

My guess... he would've moaned about ST:XI cos he wasn't involved. Just a guess.

Ali88

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 889

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 3:00 pm

I don't think he would have liked it much

He probably would have said "The movie is my vision for the future... gone wrong"

I don't think he would have liked it being set in an alternative timeline and the fact that the alternative timeline is left unrestored

The original Star Trek series was about the TOS crew exploring the universe whereas the new movie is about the TOS crew stopping some Romulan from destroying planets.

SpaceTherapist

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6370

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 3:14 pm

Quote (Ali88 @ Aug. 01 2009, 4:00 pm)
I don't think he would have liked it much

He probably would have said "The movie is my vision for the future... gone wrong"

I don't think he would have liked it being set in an alternative timeline and the fact that the alternative timeline is left unrestored

The original Star Trek series was about the TOS crew exploring the universe whereas the new movie is about the TOS crew stopping some Romulan from destroying planets.

Any time we try and speak for the dead all we do is end up putting our words in their mouths.

TheFounder

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 15676

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 3:57 pm

I think that Gene would have found and used his caps lock key.

Khoufu_Khorushu

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3694

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 4:58 pm

He'd probably say that it was nothing like his, but it had a lot better effects tahn his because of the technology. He'd still probably say it isn't the ST he created, though.

ItalianTiberius24

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 177

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 9:47 pm

I actually agree that its impossible to know how he would of felt exactly...but i cant imagine him liking how bubblegum mainstream dumbed down it was/is....i dont think he would of liked the reboot/ alternate timeline idea or how jar jar alienated alot of long time fans or the whole its not your daddy's star trek marketing scheme...but thats just my humble opinion

WkdYngMan

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3951

Report this Aug. 02 2009, 10:20 pm

Ali88 & ItalianTiberius24 - I believe you two have completely confused your own opinions with reality or what others would think.

Again, the only answer to this thread is that it is "Truly Impossible" to know what he would said, making any attempts to claim what he would think pointless and just boils down to a reflection on your own personal opinion.  Not Gene's.  Not anyone else's.

Khoufu_Khorushu

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3694

Report this Aug. 03 2009, 12:51 am

You will be incorrect. Reguessing is futile.

Mirrorgirl

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 15692

Report this Aug. 03 2009, 2:31 am

Quote (DS9TREK @ Aug. 03 2009, 4:05 am)
He moaned about ST:II cos he wasn't involved, he moaned about ST:III cos he wasn't involved, he moaned about ST:IV cos he wasn't involved, he moaned about ST:V cos he wasn't involved and... he moaned about ST:VI cos he wasn't involved.

My guess... he would've moaned about ST:XI cos he wasn't involved. Just a guess.

I gotta agree with this. I'm reading 'Movie Memories' at the moment and Gene did seem to object to everything regardless if it was good or not. I venture to say that he would have fought everything, I mean everything, in STXI and thankfully he would have been over-ridden on everything.

DS9TREK

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 14322

Report this Aug. 03 2009, 7:44 am

I don't think it is impossible to say what Roddenberry would've thought. Past behaviour is always a good indicator and like Mirriorgirl says it is out there for us to see. He hated anyone doing Trek better than he could and wasn't afraid to voice his objections.

/ I just want to be fair by pointing out not all his objections were wrong. His stand against having a 'No Smoking' sign on the bridge in ST:II was dead right for one example.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Aug. 03 2009, 8:31 am

Quote (DS9TREK @ Aug. 03 2009, 7:44 am)
I don't think it is impossible to say what Roddenberry would've thought. Past behaviour is always a good indicator and like Mirriorgirl says it is out there for us to see. He hated anyone doing Trek better than he could and wasn't afraid to voice his objections.

/ I just want to be fair by pointing out not all his objections were wrong. His stand against having a 'No Smoking' sign on the bridge in ST:II was dead right for one example.

Well, honestly, if you b!+ch and moan every day for 18 months straight, you're bound to get a few points right.

I think Gene would be amazed that his little creation has lasted 43 years and still has the capability of commanding "blockbuster" status at the box office and winning new and young fans.

Everything after that is speculation.

frimmel

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 350

Report this Aug. 03 2009, 11:09 am

I don't think he'd have liked it.

From an interview at this link.

Quote
Roddenberry: In the early days of television, you almost had to have a shootout at the end of every Western. My feelings about violence in films is similar to my feelings about sex in films. If you are going to do a movie about violence, then do a movie about violence; but don't say that 20 pages of script have gone on and there's no violence, therefore we should have some. Do your movies about violence. Do it honestly about violence and thoughtfully about violence; then move on to other subjects. The same with sex.

These are only two subjects in a world of subjects. I suppose, in the back of my mind, there's a book showing other writers that violence and sex are only two of 10,000 subjects.

Alexander: Subjects that people would happily watch and be interested in.

Roddenberry: Yes. Television got off to a very bad start regarding violence. They had pretty much unthinking writers. The Western with the man who was fast with the gun is a good example. I've been puzzled for many years why people who should know better, including philosophers, incorporate that in their thinking that violence is an answer to many things because we know in life it isn't. Violence begets violence. Everything that is supposedly wrong with television is part of what a writer puts in and reaps.

Alexander: Minimalistic violence was often reflected in your early days as a writer. Paladin, the central character on Have Gun, Will Travel", wasn't always involved in a shoot-out at the end of each episode. In many shows, he hardly pulled his gun.

Roddenberry: I was pleased with those scripts. I'm not pleased with scripts where I fell off the wagon and created a crafty fast gun who was evil without questioning very much why he was evil and had Paladin slay him. But I am pleased with the times I didn't. Violence has always been a part of American television. It seems to me that it is so easily arguable that violence is not the key or important ingredient in television drama.

Recently logged in

Users browsing this forum: Drunkin Druid, FleetAdmiral_BamBam

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum