Does that absolve him?
Does that absolve him?
Wrong.
It doesn't matter what century a Star Trek story takes place in. All eras are the same in Trek. The only question is, always, "What is the story?"
Absolution is for the believers. Dead men don't need it.
That's why I am a fan of fictional characters, never the people that create them. They always let us down.
No. But it's kept him in pretty good graces for 35 years. For a start, they can keep making Star Trek without having to ask "Is Gene involved? Are we giving money to Gene?"
As opposed to some sci-fi creators who are still with us.
I was in the stands watching a college football game (American) and it was being broadcast. When it was time for the commercial breaks all action on the field stopped and players just wandered around a bit and visited with each other. when the break was nearing the end they strolled over to their original positions and then suddenly the game resumed
'Family Guy' had an episode where they time traveled back to the first season. They were looking in the kitchen window watching themselves, remarking how they looked different (rendering styles evolved as the show went on). The funniest bit was when the old (1st season) Peter says "This reminds me of the time..." and everything froze while the presumed viewers were watching one of the little comedy insert bits. Current Peter says something like "what the hell was that all about, they just stopped..."
No, we’re giving money to Roddenberry’s creepy kid.
Rod ‘I wasn’t a fan of my Dad’s work until I realized I could bankroll it’ Roddenberry.
Last edited:
Nope.
I don't actually know much of anything about Rod aside from a Star Trek Continues cameo, what's he done that's creepy?
Gene may have been a creep and an opportunist, but I find it hard to swallow the racist accusation.
It was a necessary jump. Trek was too stuck in the same 200 year bubble, trying to cram things in canon wise.
If anything, what hampers the 32nd century stories is that they were based in Discovery to start with, which stories never seemed to use the setting for any kind of real storytelling. They were trying to set them up as some of beacon of the past and putting the same 24th century stories in a setting that they didn't work in.
Academy tried to work the new status quo into their stories, but they couldn't do much story building by choosing to use the Academy as a stoic home base. The stories were good, but it would've done well to be paired up with a starship story, free of Discovery, to story build.
If anything, what hampers the 32nd century stories is that they were based in Discovery to start with, which stories never seemed to use the setting for any kind of real storytelling. They were trying to set them up as some of beacon of the past and putting the same 24th century stories in a setting that they didn't work in.
Academy tried to work the new status quo into their stories, but they couldn't do much story building by choosing to use the Academy as a stoic home base. The stories were good, but it would've done well to be paired up with a starship story, free of Discovery, to story build.
Accounts vary. Apparently he got worse as he got older and slipped more and more into substances.
But as with many, many things surrounding Gene, it’s anecdotal.
I met Rod on the cruise. ‘Creepy’ is the last word I would use to describe him.
How would you describe him?
I didn't really care if Trek sets a show in the 32nd century or the 128th or whatever. That's fine. The only thing that was a little weird is that Enterprise had the 31s century as this seemingly unseen futuristic place and then it just became the past. But that happens in real life, so why should fiction be any different.
