Re: Trek Nation...Good, Bad, or Indifferent?
It is a medicore documentary, which tries to do two things at once and never manages to do either justice.
Trek Nation: This documentary has been in the works for nearly a decade, which only makes the end result all the more frustrating. Its principle problem is one of indecision - is this a movie about a son finding out about his father who he barely knew, or is it a movie about the Star Trek phenomenon that his father created? The movie never decides; it seems as if it began as one film and morphed into another during production, but that no one could choose which direction to ultimately take in editing.
The result of this is a mixed bag. There are home videos and unedited interview clips that suggest a Gene Roddenberry the publicity machine could never allow. There are also a parade of talking heads praising Roddenberry's vision, even crediting him for the decisions of others (including the infamous interracial kiss during the original series' third year), as well as a parade of the wackiest of fans. These latter elements are really a distraction from Rod Roddenberry's attempt to understand his father, and, worse, old hat.
Other elements are just missed opportunities; an interview with Majel Barrett before her death lets her be evasive and vague and an interview with George Lucas never seems to have a purpose or substance. Production values are top notch, but they can't provide this film with a focus.
"This begs explanation." - de Forest Research on Star Trek
My blog: Star Trek Fact Check