Things I do not like about modern day Star Trek

[toobfreak]

.gene coon created more star trek lore than roddenbury did.....

(laughing) Coon was producer from the middle of the first season to the latter part of the second. Roddenberry directly produced (and directed and wrote, etc.) up to about the middle of the first season! So of course, but there would BE no Star Trek Lore to build had Roddenberry not created it in the first place, worked out every detail of what the ship would look like, the principles, the technology, the theory of propulsion, to the sets, the crew, the philosophy, everything.

What Coon did was great mainly because he had the Roddenberry's Star Trek Universe on which to build it on.

 

[toobfreak]

I actually like the new movies and think the new actors are doing a good job of keeping the characters key traits.
Bones is still my favorite. I found the Starbase Yorktown visually stunning...

There's good in all of it. I felt the third Abrams movie Beyond was the best of the three on all levels, shame that 'Chekov' was killed in an accident with his Jeep slipping out of park and crushing him as he got out to open his gate one night. I hope that doesn't stop them from making a fourth Star Trek Abrams movie.

 

[Harry Dresden]

(laughing) Coon was producer from the middle of the first season to the latter part of the second. Roddenberry directly produced (and directed and wrote, etc.) up to about the middle of the first season! So of course, but there would BE no Star Trek Lore to build had Roddenberry not created it in the first place, worked out every detail of what the ship would look like, the principles, the technology, the theory of propulsion, to the sets, the crew, the philosophy, everything.

What Coon did was great mainly because he had the Roddenberry's Star Trek Universe on which to build it on.

so what?.....coon created a hell of a lot of that show that is still around in all the other shows.....and the guy who designed the Enterprise was Matt Jefferies based on what Roddenbury wanted........and roddenberry hired a physicist from the RAND corporation,Harvey P. Lynn Jr, to work out those details you claim he worked out....

 

[Dayton3]

so what?.....coon created a hell of a lot of that show that is still around in all the other shows.....and the guy who designed the Enterprise was Matt Jefferies based on what Roddenbury wanted........and roddenberry hired a physicist from the RAND corporation,Harvey P. Lynn Jr, to work out those details you claim he worked out....

Actually the world famous original series Enterprise concept was orginally oriented upside down to the way we know it as. After Roddenberry saw it he decided it would looked better flipped over. He was no doubt right.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Actually the world famous original series Enterprise concept was orginally oriented upside down to the way we know it as. After Roddenberry saw it he decided it would looked better flipped over. He was no doubt right.

but he didnt design the thing......and it wasnt roddenberry who did that.....some guy hung the ship up side down when they were showing the studio execs and the press....roddenberry decided this is went over well lets leave it like that...

 

[toobfreak]

so what?.....coon created a hell of a lot of that show that is still around in all the other shows.....and the guy who designed the Enterprise was Matt Jefferies based on what Roddenbury wanted........and roddenberry hired a physicist from the RAND corporation,Harvey P. Lynn Jr, to work out those details you claim he worked out....

Man, what is your hangup about Roddenberry? You do realize that while he had a team, a fraction of the team a simple 30 minute sitcom gets today while trying to do a cutting edge series never done before in record time on a shoestring budget to a hostile, begrudging network, none of the people around him would have been doing these things without Roddenberry--- GR alone knew what he wanted and these other people simply worked under HIS direction to help him flesh the ideas out into a real series!

 

[toobfreak]

Actually the world famous original series Enterprise concept was orginally oriented upside down to the way we know it as. After Roddenberry saw it he decided it would looked better flipped over. He was no doubt right.

Exactly right. Late in the development, Jeffries took the latest iteration of bits and pieces involving a saucer and other concepts and came up with a ship, which when Gene saw it, grabbed it and turned it upside down and said: "There is the Enterprise!" and the basic shape was formed!

Then they moved the sections apart, the thinking being that these things had great power and energy, so you wanted them well away from the main area of the ship.

 

[toobfreak]

 

[Harry Dresden]

Exactly right. Late in the development, Jeffries took the latest iteration of bits and pieces involving a saucer and other concepts and came up with a ship, which when Gene saw it, grabbed it and turned it upside down and said: "There is the Enterprise!" and the basic shape was formed!

View attachment 711696View attachment 711700View attachment 711701

Then they moved the sections apart, the thinking being that these things had great power and energy, so you wanted them well away from the main area of the ship.

Man, what is your hangup about Roddenberry? You do realize that while he had a team, a fraction of the team a simple 30 minute sitcom gets today while trying to do a cutting edge series never done before in record time on a shoestring budget to a hostile, begrudging network, none of the people around him would have been doing these things without Roddenberry--- GR alone knew what he wanted and these other people simply worked under HIS direction to help him flesh the ideas out into a real series!

but you said he worked out every detail of what the ship would look like, the principles, the technology, the theory of propulsion,..thats not true.....Jeffries designed the ship because unlike Roddenberry he was an aviation engineer....and he hired some Physicist at RAND corp to work out the tech of the ship.....roddenberry got the show made....others made the show look like he wanted and do what he wanted it to do.....gene was no engineer or physicist....

 

[JoeMoma]

There's good in all of it. I felt the third Abrams movie Beyond was the best of the three on all levels, shame that 'Chekov' was killed in an accident with his Jeep slipping out of park and crushing him as he got out to open his gate one night. I hope that doesn't stop them from making a fourth Star Trek Abrams movie.

I have a problem with who or what is "killed off" in the new timeline. #1... Destroying Vulcan is blasphemy! After that, I am no longer in a rush to watch anything new that is Star Trek.

 

[toobfreak]

but you said he worked out every detail of what the ship would look like, the principles, the technology, the theory of propulsion,..thats not true.....

Look, I don't know what your problem is but it is EXACTLY true. No one ever claimed Roddenberry didn't do it all himself locked in a closet, no one does that, it is a stupid infantile argument. For the first time in the annals of TV, Roddenberry took experts in related fields and consulted them on various ideas and concepts looking to make ST believable and "real." What is so damned hard to understand about that? So instead of a cigar shape with a rocket engine spewing sparks on back and a few windows on the side, we got the Enterprise driven by anti-matter. Instead of missions to planet Lorax 7 in the Gummybear galaxy, we got missions to Altair 6. Warp speed was defined and quantized. Roddenberry was actually an LA cop turned writer, director and producer and unlike Lost In Space (which CBS turned down Star Trek for), we didn't get a wobbly Jupiter 2 saucer with about 4X the interior space as outdoor volume getting lost and finding 15 other planets and dozens of other star systems just trying to get to the NEAREST one, and getting forever lost at that, Gene tapped the best minds and talents he could find to help him flesh out the details of Star Trek as scientifically credible as was possible, with HIM as the director, coach, coordinator and final arbiter of what he wanted and which became Star Trek.

Jeffries didn't design the Enterprise, he produced HUNDREDS of drawings which Gene went through and slowly took a bit of this one or that he liked, going back to the drawing-board again and again until they got closer and closer to the look and design that Roddenberry was searching for in his guts, and when he finally saw what he was looking for, he knew it. Where Jeffries really sailed, was on much of the interior set designs where he came up with the bridge layout, so good that the Navy borrowed the idea and built some ship control layouts based on a similar concept, just as medical experts demanded to know where he got the idea for the medical bed scanners, as they were working along the same ideas. And the Enterprise design continued to evolve and be fleshed out further in smaller details through the 3rd season as budgets allowed. There had been thought to making the back of the engines do a little optical effect as the front but they simply ran out of money.

What next? You gonna claim Elon Musk is a fraud who didn't really design Tesla EVs just because he hires others to do most of the work? Is their any doubt there would be no Tesla or Space X today without Musk? Likewise, there would be NO Star Trek without Roddenberry who fought tooth and nail against intransigent studios and network execs to get it hammered through at a time when TV studios wanted to produce TV shows on the same budget as 'Laugh In.' Coon was without a doubt a stupendous asset and contributor to the Star Trek world, but it is a world that NEVER WOULD HAVE EXISTED in the first place to be built upon without Gene Roddenberry. Make no mistake about that.

And Gene was not happy with some of the additions Coon made to it, but then, Coon was the Producer and Gene was off trying to develop other ideas (like The Questar Tapes). But then, Harlan Elison was FURIOUS over changes to his script to make 'City On Edge of Forever' fully Star Trekized, and while a fantastic story, in his original form, it just wasn't Star Trek. Gene, Fontana and others took Ellison's basic story and made it into the best episode of all time.

Gene was even against the 'Family' episode of TNG where Picard goes home to France after the Borg. I can see why--- I hated the episode too, but have warmed to it a bit after a fashion. But in the final analysis, Everything Star Trek began and ended with Gene Roddenberry, at least until the 2nd season when much creative control was turned over to Coon, and by the Third Season, none of it, where by then, Gene had lost all interest in the show and divorced himself from it, fed up with and exhausted fighting the networks who never stopped trying to kill it off.

 

[Correll]

I lost my... emotional connect with Star Trek, with the retro conning of the Klingon and Romanulan Empires into single planet realms.


That change, alters every instant of tension from thee klingons or romulans from a real danger to a Federation punching down.

 

[toobfreak]

I have a problem with who or what is "killed off" in the new timeline. #1... Destroying Vulcan is blasphemy! After that, I am no longer in a rush to watch anything new that is Star Trek.

I have no idea that anyone killed off Vulcan or why. I've not watched 90% of the new stuff made trying to milk money out of Star Trek. Even Gene's son who is involved in ST: Discovery has no idea about Star Trek--- during the time his father was creating and producing Star Trek, his kid had ZERO interest off getting stoned.

The only two people who really KNEW Star Trek was Gene Roddenberry and Majel Barrett, with perhaps to some lesser extent, people like John Black, Dorothy Fontana and a few other contributors.

The REAL Star Trek is best exemplified in the Cage pilot, slightly less so in the second pilot. From there they adapted the idea best as possible to a weekly serial TV show and did an amazing job for an entire season. But with network battles and pressures, the 2nd season was only about half as good if that, many great episodes populated between a lot of fair duds, but Star Trek became more space men and ray guns action adventure to satiate the masses despite drifting farther from Roddenberry's vision. And the Third Season, well, it wasn't half as good as the 2nd season, absent Gene, absent Coon, further embattled by network pressure and continually shrinking budgets.

Really, NBC shouldn't collect a dime off Star Trek as they were the ones who worked hardest to kill it.

 

[Dayton3]

I have a problem with who or what is "killed off" in the new timeline. #1... Destroying Vulcan is blasphemy! After that, I am no longer in a rush to watch anything new that is Star Trek.

I agree. I can take change in Star Trek. What I cannot abide are changes suddenly appearing completely out of nowhere like the Spock/Uhura romance or Vulcan being destroyed in the first Abramstrek movie.

And I cannot take "change for the sake of change".

 

[JoeMoma]

I agree. I can take change in Star Trek. What I cannot abide are changes suddenly appearing completely out of nowhere like the Spock/Uhura romance or Vulcan being destroyed in the first Abramstrek movie.

And I cannot take "change for the sake of change".

Nurse Chapel seemed to have a thing for Spock in TOS... but it was subtle.

 

[toobfreak]

I can take change in Star Trek.

We have to. Everything changes with time.

What I cannot abide are changes suddenly appearing completely out of nowhere like the Spock/Uhura romance or Vulcan being destroyed in the first Abramstrek movie.

Yeah, I guess someone has to be banging Uhura just as Nichelle was getting plenty of action in real life during TOS, but my interest in Star Trek goes far beyond just the actors and episodes, I'm interested in the whole field of television writing and production of which Star Trek has been a big part of my interest, so I can understand the need for a new vehicle to build on to keep trying to keep ST fresh and new, and I suppose the Spock/Uhura thing, far from the worst of the "additions" made to ST over the years, makes a certain amount of logical sense from the extension of DC Fontana fleshing out Spock's hidden sexual qualities (and attraction to female fans) which surfaced during Amok Time, not just with his drive to get married but also the emergence of Nurse Chapel's love interest in Spock.

Really, these new shows like Discovery, Picard and whatever else, are really aimed more at NEW audiences just discovering Star Trek than really to old codgers like us who actually watched Star Trek in the 1960s.

 

[22lcidw]

I have no idea that anyone killed off Vulcan or why. I've not watched 90% of the new stuff made trying to milk money out of Star Trek. Even Gene's son who is involved in ST: Discovery has no idea about Star Trek--- during the time his father was creating and producing Star Trek, his kid had ZERO interest off getting stoned.

The only two people who really KNEW Star Trek was Gene Roddenberry and Majel Barrett, with perhaps to some lesser extent, people like John Black, Dorothy Fontana and a few other contributors.

The REAL Star Trek is best exemplified in the Cage pilot, slightly less so in the second pilot. From there they adapted the idea best as possible to a weekly serial TV show and did an amazing job for an entire season. But with network battles and pressures, the 2nd season was only about half as good if that, many great episodes populated between a lot of fair duds, but Star Trek became more space men and ray guns action adventure to satiate the masses despite drifting farther from Roddenberry's vision. And the Third Season, well, it wasn't half as good as the 2nd season, absent Gene, absent Coon, further embattled by network pressure and continually shrinking budgets.

Really, NBC shouldn't collect a dime off Star Trek as they were the ones who worked hardest to kill it.

The third season was a change in direction as it was more socially conscience. Action is what many people wanted.

 

[Dayton3]

The REAL Star Trek is best exemplified in the Cage pilot,

I never cared for "The Cage" or almost anything else that Roddenberry wrote.

Besides, Roddenberry has been dead for decades. Why should we give a damn about what he would think?

 

[toobfreak]

The third season was a change in direction as it was more socially conscience. Action is what many people wanted.

Where do you get any of that rubbish from? The Third Season was nothing more than the result of a near total absence of those who created Star Trek, driven first by a now bad time slot forced by 'Laugh-In' of all things, combined with dwindling budgets making on-location stories unaffordable, even not able to afford extras to staff the ship making the ship now empty and devoid of extra crew members other than those in the story, multiplied by the questionable stewardship of Fred Freiberger to come in and carry the slop forward to the end of the season.

It's any wonder that despite all of that, they managed to still pull off some pretty good episodes like:

• The Paradise Syndrome
• Elaan of Troyius
• Requiem For Methuselah
• The Way To Eden,
• and maybe The Cloud Minders

 

[toobfreak]

I never cared for "The Cage" or almost anything else that Roddenberry wrote.

The Cage WAS Star Trek. If you don't like that then you never really loved Star Trek. It was abandoned only because the network idiots didn't understand it and thought it too cerebral and over the heads of the unwashed public. And since Roddenberry was involved in the writing of most of the episodes even when not getting screen credit, that just goes to further show that you're not really a Star Trek fan.

And you obviously never watched The Questar Tapes, a pilot that should have sold but didn't, which was pretty much a joint collaboration between Gene Roddenberry and Gene Coon.

Besides, Roddenberry has been dead for decades. Why should we give a damn about what he would think?

Because he is the reference standard by which all things Star Trek are measured. His influence was gone pretty much after about the 3rd or 4th season of TNG and all things since and it shows. Star Trek now is just like any other space adventure with space ships and aliens, it just now seldom carries the brilliance and vision which he intended for it, and is now carried manly by incredible CGI special effects like most everything else put out by Hollywood today.