"Hard-core fans might object, but “they are a slice of the pie,” said Eugene “Rod” Roddenberry, whose mother, Majel Barrett, had recurring roles in several “Trek” installments. “If you look at it from a business point of view, you want to bring in that whole new audience. You have to strike a balance, and I think J.J. did a damn good job at that.”

What would Roddenberry’s father, who died in 1991, think of it?

“He would have probably said to J.J., ‘You did it right. You brought it into 2009 the way it should be done.’ “


http://www.dailycomet.com/article/20090517/BIGFUN/905119895?Title=-Star-Trek-flies-again-with-unwritten-future


So much for the 'Gene would be rolling over in his grave' people.

"Rod" is an expert at making money from his father's legacies. Please also keep in mind that he is Gene's son from his first marriage, not his marriage to Majel. I've always sensed a bit of resentment there.

Now, don't explode on me - I'm dead CERTAIN that Gene would have been right there beside Abrams, making sure he got his share of the movie(s) take. However, if Gene were there to advise (and if Abrams and company actually LISTENED...), this movie would have a whole lot fewer detractors.

Larry

"Rod" is an expert at making money from his father's legacies. Please also keep in mind that he is Gene's son from his first marriage, not his marriage to Majel. I've always sensed a bit of resentment there.

Now, don't explode on me - I'm dead CERTAIN that Gene would have been right there beside Abrams, making sure he got his share of the movie(s) take. However, if Gene were there to advise (and if Abrams and company actually LISTENED...), this movie would have a whole lot fewer detractors.

Larry

Gene had a shot at a movie and the result was 'Star Trek: The Motionless Picture'.

Having read the unauthorized biography of Gene I've never been a member of the 'Church of Gene'. The overwhelming majority of good stuff in Trek came from people like Ted Sturgeon, Dorothy Fontana, Harlan Ellison, Jerry Sohl, etc.

Everything in NG that's stupid (ship's counselor on the bridge? We can make an artificial person but can't make realistic skin color? Wesley?) we can thank Gene for, INCLUDING not casting Bill ('Rocketer') Campbell as Riker (he would have been PERFECT). Gene's comment when someone suggested Patrick Stewart - 'Gee, I don't know. A bald Captain?' David Gerrold sued Rodenberry and Paramount for basically stealing credit for all his creative efforts on NG. He WON. A lot of money and a non-disclosure agreement and a plane ticket home.

I find it hard to imagine anyone less capable of relaunching a big, successful Trek movie than GR. But that's just my opinion. Everyone else can think I'm crazy, I don't mind. :)

BTW,

Could we stop trying to prove the folks who don't like this movie are wrong? I'm all for news about the movie and it's successor(s), but this constant effort to prove wrong anyone who says anything bad about the movie is just irritating.

"So much for the 'Gene would be rolling over in his grave' people"

My opinion of this movie will not be swayed by character witnesses, "movie critics", nor by measures of it's "success". Whle I have not paid to see this movie, I have seen more than half of it thru teasers and trailers. I'm not the type to change my mind just because more people may like it than don't. As my Mom used to say, "If everyone jumped off a cliff, would you?"

If you like it, fine! More power to you! May Abrams make an unending series of highly successful ST movies for you! However, I, (and others) do not like this movie, so please allow us our opinions, as we allow you yours.

Larry :)

Moderators - I apologize if this is offensive. Please do whatever you feel best. I've just had it past my tolerance line with the constant "not of the body" posts.

Jodet -

I respect your opinion, and sort of agree on Roddenberry!

Larry

It's Rabbit Season!!!
It's Duck Season!!!
It's Rabbit Season!!!
It's Duck Season!!!

http://charlesgriffin.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/rabbit-seasoning-mm.jpg

BTW,

Could we stop trying to prove the folks who don't like this movie are wrong? I'm all for news about the movie and it's successor(s), but this constant effort to prove wrong anyone who says anything bad about the movie is just irritating.

"So much for the 'Gene would be rolling over in his grave' people"

My opinion of this movie will not be swayed by character witnesses, "movie critics", nor by measures of it's "success". Whle I have not paid to see this movie, I have seen more than half of it thru teasers and trailers. I'm not the type to change my mind just because more people may like it than don't. As my Mom used to say, "If everyone jumped off a cliff, would you?"

If you like it, fine! More power to you! May Abrams make an unending series of highly successful ST movies for you! However, I, (and others) do not like this movie, so please allow us our opinions, as we allow you yours.

Larry :)

Moderators - I apologize if this is offensive. Please do whatever you feel best. I've just had it past my tolerance line with the constant "not of the body" posts.

So three hundred posts of 'this turd', 'this abomination', 'this will suck', 'I won't even see this on dvd', 'Gene Rodenberry will be rolling over in his grave', and on and on and on for months - that's ok with you? But a legitimate link to a new article about Gene's son comments on the movie in the 'movies for modelers' forum....that's too much?

This post was not about your opinion of the movie. It's about Gene's son's opinion of the movie. Since so many people have 'spoken' for Gene, I thought seeing what his son is saying would be interesting to people.

It's Rabbit Season!!!
It's Duck Season!!!
It's Rabbit Season!!!
It's Duck Season!!!

http://charlesgriffin.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/rabbit-seasoning-mm.jpg

You win the coveted 'Best Post of the Day' award!

Funny, I always identified with Daffy more than Bugs. His life feels more familiar to me. :)


PS: I've read most of the 'making of trek books', biographies, etc. If you're interested in that kind of thing, this one was fascinating :

http://www.amazon.com/Gene-Roddenberry-Myth-Behind-Star/dp/0786880880/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243970427&sr=1-14

The whole "blessing" thing via Rod Roddenberry is not as exclusive as one might think. He also did a bit of brief collaboration and endorsement of two fan-produced Trek projects: Star Trek Hidden Frontier and Star Trek New Voyages. When you consider the differences between those two projects and JJ-Trek, it's not just each project individually, but what they contribute to the franchise and the attention they draw to it. Considering that Rod has his own website Roddenberry.com, the more attention drawn to the franchise, the better.

Bryan

"Rod" is an expert at making money from his father's legacies. Please also keep in mind that he is Gene's son from his first marriage, not his marriage to Majel.

Larry

Gosh, if he's making money off Star Trek you sure can't take his viewpoint seriously. Sounds to me like the apple didn't fall far from the tree.

And I bet Rod was behind that whole IDIC fiasco, since he was from a first marriage he was probably talking by the time it aired.

Never mind that Gene Roddenberry was the guy who made a mint charging teenage boys twenty 1975 dollars to watch a black & white print of "The Cage" and a scratched up 16mm "Blooper" reel at his Star Trek events.(I know, I was one)

I can respect your point about people not convincing you a movie you think is bad is good. But by the same token, some folks gotta realize they can't convince some people that Gene Roddenberry was a genius/expert on all things Star Trek, and Star Trek TMP was a great Trek movie.

This is one fire I'm not gonna pour gasoline on. I'm outta here!

I think its funny... someone using a comment from one guy about another guy who's dead and can't speak for himself as a validation. Anyone can do that. It means nothing, unless you want it to.

And please don't pretend this wasn't posted to beat those who dislike the film over the head. It clearly was. :rolleyes:

Gene's gone... we can only guess what he would think. Its just as probable that he would liked the movie as he would not have liked it. I think he probably would have loved bringing back the Original series in some way. But, I also think if he had been involved, it would not have been this movie.

And personally I think my opinion is as valid as Eugene's or anyone else's, because is reasonable... and, of cousre, GR isn't here to prove me wrong!:wave:

And please don't pretend this wasn't posted to beat those who dislike the film over the head. It clearly was. :rolleyes:


Of course it was, just like everything positive posted about the film. Nobody actually likes it, it's all part of the vast liberal media conspiracy to beat older Star Trek fans over the head.

I've just had it past my tolerance line with the constant "not of the body" posts.

You know.......if the people who are not of the body joined us, then we would all be of the body. RESULT: NO MORE "not of the body" POSTS!!!

:tongue:

Folks, I apologize for my losing my temper, but I've reached my saturation level for people trying to prove those of us who don't like the movie "wrong" about not liking it. Why is so important that everyone like it? (It's not.)

So, rather than continue to fan the flames, I promise I will no longer post in any Star Trek Movie threads. Hopefully, this will calm down and be forgtten
sooner than later. It's just not worth the effort to defend my opinion here.


Larry
:freak:

Yes! Larry is of the body!

Folks, I apologize for my losing my temper, but I've reached my saturation level for people trying to prove those of us who don't like the movie "wrong" about not liking it. Why is so important that everyone like it? (It's not.)

So, rather than continue to fan the flames, I promise I will no longer post in any Star Trek Movie threads. Hopefully, this will calm down and be forgtten
sooner than later. It's just not worth the effort to defend my opinion here.


Larry
:freak:

If the movie crashed and burned and lost money and got rotten reviews and Gene Roddenberrys son was quoted in an article about how much it sucked, that would be ok, right? Think back on all the crap that us 'gee, we're enthusiastic about the big-budget Trek project with a great cast' people had to read on this forum. It won't kill you to read one post that says, 'hey, check out this interesting article'.

I'm so sorry for you that the movie is a big critical and commercial success.

It is painfully obvious the 'Let's make a movie with William Shatner' or the 'Let's make a DS9 movie', etc, people have been left in the dust. This was the strongest approach to a new Trek reboot. It succeeded beyond expectations. That should not be so terribly hard to live with.

Whle I have not paid to see this movie, I have seen more than half of it thru teasers and trailers. I'm not the type to change my mind just because more people may like it than don't.

I'm a little confused, are you saying you haven't seen the movie? That's the way I read what you wrote; you've seen teasers and trailer, but not the fully assembled movie as it was intended to be viewed. I'm really not trying to make you wrong about this, but as someone who has watched Trek since it was first on the air and has embraced every iteration of Trek with hunger (not so much with Enterprise, but I digress), I urge you to see the film for yourself. This one might be ...well ...how to put it? ...it might actually be the most emotionally honest of the Trek films. Did I have problems with it? Sure; nothing's perfect. But ultimately as a gray haired adult who's belief system was profoundly influenced by that TV show (I might not have a moral compass if not for McCoy), I felt like this was the Trek movie I'd been waiting for since I was a child. I'd love for you to see this movie so you and I, as old time Trek fans, can talk about it, what worked, what didn't.

John O.

Oh Great Googly Moogly, you guys! :mad:

You can't have it both ways, Larry. You can't be critical of Gene Roddenberry's son just because he backs the new movie all while being thin-skinned because some folks like the movie and are tired of hearing the exact same posts from the exact same people constantly panning the new movie. That's just unrealistic and a double standard.


From now until 18 June, 2009, no more threads about the New Trek Movie.

No more comments about the New Trek Movie.

This is good or bad comments or threads. I don't want to hear about it 'cause you guys finally got me torqued off enough not to want to hear or say or see anything about the New Trek Movie. Anyone who brings it up is going to get a 7 Day Time Out.

Go ahead and call me Heavy Handed or worse names - just do it in a PM - 'cause I really don't care. There is the majority of you who can discuss rationally, politely and - more importantly! - maturely! Then there are the few who can't seem to discuss the subject in anything remotely mature - and that goges for both sides of the equation. Some folks who like the movie have to constantly snipe at those who didn't like the movie w/their cheap shots and that's just as bad as those who have to constantly moan and complain about how much they can't stand the new movie.

So, no more talk of the new movie until 18 June, 2009 at 12:00am.