Clearly, he'd want whatever I want and disapprove of whatever I disapprove of. This lends my opinion greater validity than the opinions of anyone who disagrees with me, up to and including Ron Moore, Ira Steven Behr, Rick Berman, JJ Abrams and anyone else whose take on Star Trek was, is, or will be not to my liking.
What would Roddenberry want in XI??
- Thread starter Cheapjack
- Start date
- Status
Clearly, he'd want whatever I want and disapprove of whatever I disapprove of. This lends my opinion greater validity than the opinions of anyone who disagrees with me, up to and including Ron Moore, Ira Steven Behr, Rick Berman, JJ Abrams and anyone else whose take on Star Trek was, is, or will be not to my liking.
Just guessing of course, but I think Roddenberry might want XI to 1) contain a good human interest story. A story that was thought provoking...not just flash. 2) Something that would benefit him financially, reputation or emotionally.
For the latter, when you are a are part of something (or your name is attached to something), you hope it brings you some benefit (usually). Whether it be happiness, financial (if it involves work) or just reflects positively on "you".
From what has been released thus far, I think we are going to get a good human interest story (based on both Spock and Kirk). The recent movie trailer implies this at least.
If the movie is made well, then I think it will reflect positively on the Roddenberry name as well.
For the latter, when you are a are part of something (or your name is attached to something), you hope it brings you some benefit (usually). Whether it be happiness, financial (if it involves work) or just reflects positively on "you".
From what has been released thus far, I think we are going to get a good human interest story (based on both Spock and Kirk). The recent movie trailer implies this at least.
If the movie is made well, then I think it will reflect positively on the Roddenberry name as well.
Actually, what some people have tried to hint here, is that the message of ST11 will be:'You can be a Starship Captain if you started off as a brat'.
That's a big, relevant, message. That'll do!
Brett:
All we can go on is what he said. We do have that. If we ignore that, we're wrong.
That's a big, relevant, message. That'll do!
Brett:
All we can go on is what he said. We do have that. If we ignore that, we're wrong.
Right, because people never say anything they don't mean and always say exactly what they think.
Not true. We can compare things that he said with the things that he actually did and the testimony of other people who worked on Trek with him.
If you privilege his claims ahead of all other information - particularly the things he did - you're wrong.
You keep making Roddenberry out to be a greedy materialist and hypocrite, at least as much as anyone today in these greedy times, Starship.
It was a long time before he made any real money out of Star Trek, he could have made more, he could have allowed tobacco advertising or not had a mixed race crew, to sell in the south, but he didn't. There were lots of things he could have done. I'm sure he wanted to make his millions AS WELL as making good fiction, but I'm sure he had principles. Some people do, you know.
I'm sure that Gene Roddenberry was selfish, he was just more 'long-sightedly' selfish than some, perhaps. He bargained that ST would be more successful,(and make him more money), if he stuck to his guns over these things.
Or. perhaps he just wanted to do some good in the world.
Hang on, I hear the men in the white coats knocking again!
I accept the fact that Gene Roddenberry was not perfect. I know he was an alchoholic. He used cocaine. He could be very jealous. He wanted to make money. I should imagine, if he hadn't had a bath for a month and wore the same clothes, he would have smelled terrible.
But, does this mean he was wrong when he said that that mixed races should work together in the future? That we should avoid nuclear war, not let a computer run everything or try to be more tolerant? Or any of the other things ST is famous for?
The problem with our time is that we expect people to be perfect. It's people in this time whom you can't get any dirt on are the ones I'm a bit wary of.
Or. perhaps he just wanted to do some good in the world.
Hang on, I hear the men in the white coats knocking again!
I accept the fact that Gene Roddenberry was not perfect. I know he was an alchoholic. He used cocaine. He could be very jealous. He wanted to make money. I should imagine, if he hadn't had a bath for a month and wore the same clothes, he would have smelled terrible.
But, does this mean he was wrong when he said that that mixed races should work together in the future? That we should avoid nuclear war, not let a computer run everything or try to be more tolerant? Or any of the other things ST is famous for?
The problem with our time is that we expect people to be perfect. It's people in this time whom you can't get any dirt on are the ones I'm a bit wary of.
Last edited:
I'm sure that Gene Roddenberry was selfish, he was just more 'long-sightedly' selfish than some, perhaps. He bargained that ST would be more successful,(and make him more money), if he stuck to his guns over these things.
Or. perhaps he just wanted to do some good in the world.
Hang on, I hear the men in the white coats knocking again!
You made your point, straightjacket.
Gayland, planet of the apes!
I'm sure that Gene Roddenberry was selfish, he was just more 'long-sightedly' selfish than some, perhaps. He bargained that ST would be more successful,(and make him more money), if he stuck to his guns over these things.
Or. perhaps he just wanted to do some good in the world.
Hang on, I hear the men in the white coats knocking again!
You made your point, straightjacket.
I dont see the
icon, there, Xortex!Do you really think that's needed, for wanting to improve the lot of humanity?
What a world Thatcher and Reagan have given us. There was once a time when Mutually Assured Destruction spelt MAD!
Last edited:
or the tinman from wizard of Oz?
There's probably never been a truly evil thing done in the name of humanity or progress that wasn't intended to "improve" us and our lot.
Last edited:
Shall we just fast forward to the point where somebody compares Roddenberry to Hitler and get it over with?
A splash of color can liven up any room.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
