Boring

[Marsden]

I think Roddenberry's intentions were money in his pocket.

I don't know about Livingston.

I understand where Ziriath is coming from, even if I don't actually agree completely. I know for myself, I wan't my old friends back and got these other old people that turned back into my friends somewhat by the end. I'd have preferred they all started more the same, also. And Kirk not be a Jerk. And I never enjoy seeing Stephen Collins or anyone else's junk.

 

[Ziriath]

Yes, I did not expect them to be the same as they were when TOS ended. But in the subsequent movies their relationships worked much better than in TMP. Spock become a fatherly person and a good captain in TWOK and TUC, and I liked it. The kolinahr wasn't much important, when it got broken by the end of TMP anyway.

 

[EnriqueH]

I think Roddenberry's intentions were money in his pocket.

You say that like it's a bad thing?

I don't totally agree.

We all know Roddenberry had some financial difficulty and that Star Trek was his ticket to big money if could pull it off, but he was not short-sighted enough to cook his golden goose by intentionally doing a shitty job on the movie.

I think he really tried to make a great Star Trek movie...while cashing in.

And having had some money woes lately myself, I can't say I blame him for trying to get some financial security.

 

[Greg Cox]

I think Roddenberry's intentions were money in his pocket.

You say that like it's a bad thing?

I don't totally agree.

We all know Roddenberry had some financial difficulty and that Star Trek was his ticket to big money if could pull it off, but he was not short-sighted enough to cook his golden goose by intentionally doing a shitty job on the movie.

I think he really tried to make a great Star Trek movie...while cashing in.

And having had some money woes lately myself, I can't say I blame him for trying to get some financial security.

Here's the thing where art and commerce are concerned. They aren't mutually exclusive. Of course, Roddenberry wanted to make money. Doesn't mean he didn't also take pride in his creation and wasn't trying to make the best STAR TREK movie he could, according to his own lights.

Just because an artist wants to make a living doesn't mean they're only about the money. It's not an either/or thing.

 

[EnriqueH]

I think Roddenberry's intentions were money in his pocket.

You say that like it's a bad thing?

I don't totally agree.

We all know Roddenberry had some financial difficulty and that Star Trek was his ticket to big money if could pull it off, but he was not short-sighted enough to cook his golden goose by intentionally doing a shitty job on the movie.

I think he really tried to make a great Star Trek movie...while cashing in.

And having had some money woes lately myself, I can't say I blame him for trying to get some financial security.

Here's the thing where art and commerce are concerned. They aren't mutually exclusive. Of course, Roddenberry wanted to make money. Doesn't mean he didn't also take pride in his creation and wasn't trying to make the best STAR TREK movie he could, according to his own lights.

Just because an artist wants to make a living doesn't mean they're only about the money. It's not an either/or thing.

Exactly right.

 

[drt]

Yes, I did not expect them to be the same as they were when TOS ended. But in the subsequent movies their relationships worked much better than in TMP. Spock become a fatherly person and a good captain in TWOK and TUC, and I liked it. The kolinahr wasn't much important, when it got broken by the end of TMP anyway.

That was the purpose of Spock's character arc in TMP, finally realizing after his mind-meld with Vger that pure logic wasn't his path.

 

[Marsden]

I think Roddenberry's intentions were money in his pocket.

You say that like it's a bad thing?

I don't totally agree.

We all know Roddenberry had some financial difficulty and that Star Trek was his ticket to big money if could pull it off, but he was not short-sighted enough to cook his golden goose by intentionally doing a shitty job on the movie.

I think he really tried to make a great Star Trek movie...while cashing in.

And having had some money woes lately myself, I can't say I blame him for trying to get some financial security.

Here's the thing where art and commerce are concerned. They aren't mutually exclusive. Of course, Roddenberry wanted to make money. Doesn't mean he didn't also take pride in his creation and wasn't trying to make the best STAR TREK movie he could, according to his own lights.

Just because an artist wants to make a living doesn't mean they're only about the money. It's not an either/or thing.

I agree, I only said that specifically in response to another poster talking about "Gene's original intention" as if that matters. I don't care if you are a creator, producer, writer or director, original intentions rarely count for anything.

A lot of people kind of put Gene up on a pedistal and then a whole other bunch seemed to act like he was terrible. I don't belong to either of those groups. I'm happy he was able to get done what he did but while I didn't like everything he did, I like Star Trek. I would hope he'd be compensated, but it's not easy, some people make a lot of other people's work and others not much on their own. It's not based on "deserving" it.