I don't care anymore
- Thread starter MadBaggins
- Start date
Portrayal of the TRUTH? Forgive me for being blunt... but what the hell does that mean? It was, after all, ENTIRELY FICTIONAL. What part of it was "true?"
Each of them is at LEAST as talented as Roddenberry was. Roddenberry was the "mother" of one of my favorite TV shows... but I don't see him as a God. He was just a guy who came up with a TV show. I'm not a big fan of RDM, but he has plenty of proponents. And I AM a big fan of JMS, despite the abject hatred that some folks here tend to show. Both, however you choose to look at them, did their own TV shows which have been at least as popular and at least as successful as Star Trek was during its initial run. Both are well-regarded by lots of people (even if JMS, in particular, is hated by the most rabid "Roddenberry is God" disciples), and both created works which, while having a few flaws here and there, are widely acknowledged as being high-quality entertainment, just as Trek was.
The analogy holds remarkably well. It's fine for you to personally dislike either (as I said, I'm not PERSONALLY a huge fan of Ron Moore's stuff) but you can't deny basic facts.
We should also incidentally be adding JJ Abrams to the list of those who have done as much as Roddenberry or Sterling to tv history and "how stories are *TOLD*" on screen - JMS and Abrams have had an impact in this regard without much doubt.
Sharr
Abrams is nowhere near Serling, Abrams left Lost after the pilot Serling wrote 92 of the original Twilight Zone's 110 eps. one more than JMS wrote for B5, he also wrote the first Planet Of The Apes movie. Abrams only has one otehr movie under his belt Mission: Impossible 3 and a few other movies including Armageddon. Roddenberry hasn't had his name on that many scripts after Star Trek came along but he did write alot more that he got credit for before that.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0734472/
And the Mission:Impossible movies were nothing like the TV show but that's not completely Abrams' fault none of them were all that close to how the TV series worked. Whatever Abrams brings to the Star Trek is something we'll find out next year, right now I think the odds are 50/50 that we'll get a good movie.
Pretty much the way I felt when I read that statement. But permit me an attempt at explanation. Trek has long been viewed by many of its fans as espousing certain truths about humanity. Whether portrayed through the visages of "aliens" or of the humans we see inthe shows themselves, there is almost always some comment about human behavior or potential.
xortex, my apologies if I botched that up.
Fan though I may be, no way am I qualified to say who is "as good as" anyone else. I can only say whose work appeals to me and leave it at that. RDM... can't really speak too much there. JMS however... well, it ought to be as clear as altair water that I am a fan of his.
And I can say that he is on record as saying he isn't worthy of using The Great Bird's typewriter. That's the amount of respect JMS holds for Gene.
Oh disagree particularly regarding JMS who basically reintroduced the idea of telling an on going story arc to American audiences never mind working on a budget and mainstreaming CGI for tv. Not to mention making a show "about something" without that getting in the way of it being good entertainment. That's what a tv producer and writers are *supposed to do*, that's why they get paid to make entertaining and successful shows.
Abrams only had anything to do with MI:III the first two were all Tom Cruise...
Plus he is credited with producing what I'm pretty sure was a recent hit movie and having alot to do with the story idea behind it. Some of those producers of LOST are are also produces on this project. At any rate I trust is ability to tell a complex and layered (not to mention interesting) story within the span of two hours.
Sharr
JMS is a HUGE fan of Rod Serling and The Twilight Zone and even he refuses to see himself as being anywhere near the quality of writer that Serling was.
http://www.jmsnews.com/msg.aspx?id=1-17127&query=Rod%20Serling
Well that's good and fine - we all have our heroes and people we look to in our fields of endeavor, just tells me his ego isn't nearly as large as some of us sometimes think it is.
Doesn't change the fact that overall I usually like his style and I think he "Get's the *human* adventure" far better then most of the later day Trek writers have who for the most part have removed the real human element from the Trekverse.
My point though writers and producers are hired to make and sell entertainment, that's what GR's job was when he made his pitch to the Desilu people, that's what they hired him to do they did not hire him with the assumption or expectation that he would or should "change the world", and its a stretch to think he did any such thing in a meaningful manner.
What GR did do was make a compelling tv show that at one point in time was fairly mainstream and popular, at least enough to attract a fan following though one that has come to overestimate themselves and thing the that they love in various ways. Star Trek is entertainment at times good somewhat smart (though not always and often self-defeating when it "acts smart" rather then just tries to tell a good story...) that is the job of any tv producer to make good entertainment.
Sharr
Well seeing what JMS wanted to do with Star Trek that's debatable.
http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf
Although taking another look at that version it does have some similarities with what we've heard of the new movie.
http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf
Although taking another look at that version it does have some similarities with what we've heard of the new movie.
DWF said:
Well seeing what JMS wanted to do with Star Trek that's debatable.
http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf
Although taking another look at that version it does have some similarities with what we've heard of the new movie.
I don't see any link between this film and JMS's version of Trek. Care to be specific?
Oh I wasn't in love with JMS's Trek ptich, felt to me like he wanted to go back home (B5) and am glad he final got the chance and appears he will again at some point.
Sharr
Sharr Khan said:
DWF said:
Well seeing what JMS wanted to do with Star Trek that's debatable.
http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf
Although taking another look at that version it does have some similarities with what we've heard of the new movie.
I don't see any link between this film and JMS's version of Trek. Care to be specific?
Oh I wasn't in love with JMS's Trek ptich, felt to me like he wanted to go back home (B5) and am glad he final got the chance and appears he will again at some point.
Sharr
JJ Abrams version we're told is something of a re-telling not quite a reimaging and that nobody will be safe unlike other prequels.
DWF said:
Sharr Khan said:
DWF said:
Well seeing what JMS wanted to do with Star Trek that's debatable.
http://bztv.typepad.com/newsviews/files/ST2004Reboot.pdf
Although taking another look at that version it does have some similarities with what we've heard of the new movie.
I don't see any link between this film and JMS's version of Trek. Care to be specific?
Oh I wasn't in love with JMS's Trek ptich, felt to me like he wanted to go back home (B5) and am glad he final got the chance and appears he will again at some point.
Sharr
JJ Abrams version we're told is something of a re-telling not quite a reimaging and that nobody will be safe unlike other prequels.
Well I suppose we'll be surprised but I have doubts any of the main Trek characters have anything to worry about. If they kill off Scotty, Uhura, Chekov... ect I'd be truly amazed.
Sharr
JMS said that name writers would work on B5, too. That lasted one season.
It probably would've worked too but it took five years to Harlan Ellison and Neil Gaiman to write for B5.
Still given the writers of the Star Trek movie I think it'll still be an upbeat family movie I don't think they're going to try for a "PG-13" rating.
Getting some big name writers for the JMS/Zybel version of Star Trek I think would only have made it a darker show.
I always figured it'd be a PG-13 movie for sure. Mostly because all of the screen shots we've seen so far are dark, so this is clearly the tone they're going to be setting for the movie. Dark and gritty. But not R gritty.
Similar threads
