RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,887
Posts: 5,386,644
Members: 24,715
Currently online: 474
Newest member: Noga74

TrekToday headlines

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Cumberbatch To Voice Khan
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Shaun And Ed On Phineas and Ferb
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

New Ships Coming From Official Starships Collection
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Trek Stars Take On Ice Bucket Challenge
By: T'Bonz on Aug 18

Retro Review: Profit and Lace
By: Michelle on Aug 16

Eve Engaged
By: T'Bonz on Aug 15

Shatner’s Get A Life DVD Debuts
By: T'Bonz on Aug 14

TV Alert: Takei Oprah Appearance
By: T'Bonz on Aug 14


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 23 2013, 08:15 PM   #121
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

Well, Therin of Andor is the one who has the information on the translated edition; I'm just passing along my memory of what I've seen him say in the past. Personally I think the main reason is confusion with the Star Wars novelization that Foster did ghostwrite.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 23 2013, 08:29 PM   #122
Silvercrest
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Lost in Moria (Arlington, WA, USA)
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

I agree it's mainly that, exacerbated by his TMP story credit. I've made the mistake myself in the past due to those two factors.
Silvercrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 29 2013, 11:48 PM   #123
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

diankra wrote: View Post
unless someone who didn't speak French had just guessed at the meaning and latched onto the lack of any separate mention for Roddenberry at the bottom.
I believe that was it, yes.

Additionally, in the days of hastily handtyped library catalogue cards, many such mistakes occurred in the cataloguing, too, especially with English-speaking library staff processing foreign-language books. They've focused on the credits below the title, not noticing the name at the top in large print. They were looking for "de..."/"by...". (As a teacher librarian, I can even imagine a library putting a "F FOS" spine label on it.)

I had been informed that Roddenberry's name was completely missing from that page.

But yes, when the secret came out about the ghostwriting of the "Star Wars" novel, people did start looking at TMP with suspicion.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 14 2013, 12:46 AM   #124
NeedleOfInquiry
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

I once saw David Gerald (The writer of "Trouble With Tribbles") at a Star Trek convention. His opinion was as follows:

"Gene Roddenberry had the ability to turn a bad script into a good script. He also had the ability to turn a great script into a good script."

Interesting perspective.
NeedleOfInquiry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 14 2013, 02:48 AM   #125
Sran
Fleet Captain
 
Sran's Avatar
 
Location: The Captain's Table
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

^Interesting.

--Sran
__________________
"Many things seem clever to an imbecile." --Captain Thelin th'Valrass, USS Enterprise-- "The Chimes at Midnight"
Sran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 06:10 AM   #126
A beaker full of death
Vice Admiral
 
A beaker full of death's Avatar
 
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

GR was a competent television writer who had a good grounding in literary science fiction. Some of his Have Gun scripts are excellent.
Now, when I say he was competent, that's saying a lot. He knew formal plot structure, characterization, and the myriad other things that used to go into a television script.
He also had a very interesting idea for a tv series.
He wasn't a visionary; he wasn't a genius; he wasn't a messianic figure. He had some talent, a lot of skill, and a lot of talented people around him, like Coon and Fontana. He also had the completely justifiable impulse to do what he had to do to make a buck.

Forgive me; I skipped most of this thread: has "sour owl poop" been mentioned yet?
__________________
"shall not be infringed" is naturally open to infringements of all kinds, because shut up and think of the children.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/...#ixzz2ImW0V3GV
A beaker full of death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 08:03 PM   #127
MakeshiftPython
Captain
 
MakeshiftPython's Avatar
 
Location: Ladies love Riker's beard.
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

He's a fine writer as long as he focused on telling a story. He lost that with TNG, seemed more interested in presenting his ideal vision of 24th century humanity than anything else.
MakeshiftPython is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 09:51 PM   #128
Nebusj
Rear Admiral
 
Nebusj's Avatar
 
View Nebusj's Twitter Profile
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

A beaker full of death wrote: View Post
GR was a competent television writer who had a good grounding in literary science fiction. Some of his Have Gun scripts are excellent.
Now, when I say he was competent, that's saying a lot. He knew formal plot structure, characterization, and the myriad other things that used to go into a television script.
Indeed, one of his scripts for Have Gun, Will Travel --- at least the radio series; I don't know if this made it onto TV --- contains a strikingly good insight about entertainment. In the story Paladin is trying to tame the shrew^W a wild western sharpshooter lass who's a little too wild for her stage ambitions. Paladin explains that Elaan of Troyius Gulch can't just be herself because (paraphrasing) ``to be a successful entertainer you have to give the audience something they haven't seen before, but not too much like they haven't seen before''. Which, really, is so.
Nebusj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16 2013, 10:40 PM   #129
A beaker full of death
Vice Admiral
 
A beaker full of death's Avatar
 
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

Yes, that one was indeed on tv.
__________________
"shall not be infringed" is naturally open to infringements of all kinds, because shut up and think of the children.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/...#ixzz2ImW0V3GV
A beaker full of death is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2013, 01:12 AM   #130
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

No, I don't think Gene Roddenberry was a terrible writer, necessarily.

I think he was servicable. I think he knew his comfort zone, with regards to what worked for him and he stuck to that. As a result, his talent and abilities didn't blossom as they should've. He didn't strive to improve his craft, because he didn't want to play a longshot with his career, even if that meant he could win big. He wanted a sure thing. That means not pushing anything. Bracket your work and stay within those boundaries so you don't get too close for comfort with subject matter, or dialogue. Don't offend or confuse your audience and you might just keep them ... and your job.

I wish STAR TREK could've been much more gritty and realistic, instead of always being so stylized, but ... it also puts you in the frame of mind, too, where you understand that this is not meant to represent reality. So you look for the metaphors and the subtext to connect with that particular episode's nugget of truth:
Power Corrupts. Beauty and Goodness Aren't Mutually Exclusive. Revenge is Cheap and Unsatisfying. Nobody Wants War. Whatever the message, that is what Gene Roddenberry's STAR TREK was about, rather than taking a literal stance on it as being a simulated map of Humanity's future.
__________________
♫♪ Everything's rosey and everything's jake.
But just how much can a good guy take?
I told ya "I love ya," now ... Get out! ♫♪
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2013, 04:17 AM   #131
Christopher
Writer
 
Christopher's Avatar
 
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
I wish STAR TREK could've been much more gritty and realistic, instead of always being so stylized, but ... it also puts you in the frame of mind, too, where you understand that this is not meant to represent reality.
Well, actually, by the standards of 1960s television, TOS was realistic. That was the whole point. As Roddenberry makes clear in his series pitch and writers' bible, his goal was to get away from the fanciful, broad, kid-oriented approach to science fiction from things like Lost in Space and do an SF show that was just as serious, smart, and naturalistic as the acclaimed adult dramas of the day like Gunsmoke, Naked City, and Wagon Train. He was one of the first SFTV producers to consult with scientists, engineers, and think tanks to come up with plausible ideas about how to portray the future; as far as I know, the only previous show that used scientific consultants at all was Tom Corbett, Space Cadet, which had the famous science writer/historian Willy Ley as its technical advisor.

So it's not at all true that ST wasn't meant to be realistic. It was meant to be the most realistic SFTV show ever made up to that point, and largely succeeded -- though that's historically been a very low bar to clear. It's just that the goalposts for "gritty realism" have moved between the '60s and today. What looked true-to-life and naturalistic to '60s audiences looks stagey and stylized by modern standards.
__________________
Christopher L. Bennett Homepage -- Site update 4/8/14 including annotations for Rise of the Federation: Tower of Babel

Written Worlds -- My blog
Christopher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2013, 03:12 PM   #132
CaptPapa
Commander
 
Location: I really do not know . . .
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

^ That's it exactly. The original series has got to be viewed, or even remembered, in context with the times in which it was made.
__________________
ME, what did I do?
CaptPapa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2013, 04:34 PM   #133
Lance
Fleet Captain
 
Lance's Avatar
 
Location: The Enterprise's Restroom
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

Christopher wrote: View Post
2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
I wish STAR TREK could've been much more gritty and realistic, instead of always being so stylized, but ... it also puts you in the frame of mind, too, where you understand that this is not meant to represent reality.
Well, actually, by the standards of 1960s television, TOS was realistic. That was the whole point. As Roddenberry makes clear in his series pitch and writers' bible, his goal was to get away from the fanciful, broad, kid-oriented approach to science fiction from things like Lost in Space and do an SF show that was just as serious, smart, and naturalistic as the acclaimed adult dramas of the day like Gunsmoke, Naked City, and Wagon Train. He was one of the first SFTV producers to consult with scientists, engineers, and think tanks to come up with plausible ideas about how to portray the future; as far as I know, the only previous show that used scientific consultants at all was Tom Corbett, Space Cadet, which had the famous science writer/historian Willy Ley as its technical advisor.

So it's not at all true that ST wasn't meant to be realistic. It was meant to be the most realistic SFTV show ever made up to that point, and largely succeeded -- though that's historically been a very low bar to clear. It's just that the goalposts for "gritty realism" have moved between the '60s and today. What looked true-to-life and naturalistic to '60s audiences looks stagey and stylized by modern standards.
Christopher is right. I think there's a revisionist streak which can't quite get over the stylistic aspects of TOS, but it's certainly worth remembering that in it's time TOS was regarded as very forward thinking, a realistic approach to a potential future in space, 'true sci-fiction television' as compared against the hokey B-Movie stuff that people were used to watching. There was a time when TOS's gadgets genuinely did look futuristic, when its adherence to an internal continuity (as opposed to the mostly anthology-type shows which had preceeded it) impressed people with how richly it was drawn, on how much it was based on postulated fact rather than seeming fanciful as did many other sci-fi programmes of the time, like Lost In Space.

We take a lot of what TOS did for granted now. But in context of its time, it was clearly a cut above the rest in terms of seeming genuinely real and believable.
Lance is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2013, 09:17 PM   #134
Maurice
Vice Admiral
 
Maurice's Avatar
 
Location: Maurice in San Francisco
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

I'll have to look for it again, but I swear there's at least one contemporary review of Star Trek which pillories it for being too fantastic given that it was promoted to be so realistic.
__________________
* * *
"If you wanted to get a good meeting... just go in and
say 'darker, grittier, sexier' and whatever."
—Glen Larson, 2010
Maurice is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 29 2013, 09:35 PM   #135
Melakon
Vice Admiral
 
Melakon's Avatar
 
Location: Unmarked grave, Ekos
Re: Was Roddenberry a Terrible Writer?

Maurice, Variety trashed it in their original review, saying it was more fit for Saturday morning kid fare. Perhaps that's the one you're remembering.

Oh wait, that was the series, not TMP.
__________________
Moe: I'll take the blonde!
Larry: I'll take the brunette!
Curly: I'll take the Black and Tan!
--Wee Wee Monsieur (1938)
Melakon is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.