The Omega Glory (TOS)

[Yukaphile]

I'd argue the heart of Trek was the writers, because without them, well then, you wouldn't get enough good stories to keep it alive. "Wrath of Khan," "Best of Both Worlds" and other tales came from people outside Gene, who had absolutely no control over the final product, and that had to have killed him on the inside. We see how bad his writing was when it comes to early TNG. That's why early TNG sucked. Because of him and his petty jealousy that Harve Bennett had created the most beloved Trek movie even a decade later while his got the often-mocked stamp of "The Slow-Motion Picture" and "The Motionless Picture." And speaking of TMP, that was obviously Gene trying to rip off 2001: A Space Odyssey. The man didn't have an original bone in his body, and looked to others to steal from, and thought while doing so it would get him awards and praise. This was actually in someone's article. That when you met George Lucas after 1977, he was still humble, while if you met Gene, you had the sense that he radiated of "I'M STAR TREK!" Gene was very prototypical Hollywood with its arrogance and elitism, and I can't stand the bastard. I'd even argue his declining health helped TNG, because if he hadn't died, he'd have still reined tight control over it and probably killed the series.

[ChiggyvonRichthofen]

That's what I give Roddenberry the most credit for, though. Not for his "utopian vision", but as a writer, showrunner, and producer. In those roles, he had his hand in several of Trek's formative stories. We have different notes and recollections that give us an idea of his effect on several different stories, but it's impossible to say list every contribution or change he made to different episodes.

One of the most obvious examples is City on the Edge of Forever. Does Ellison deserve a lion's share of the credit? Sure. But Roddenberry is partially responsible for the story as it is. There are those who think that Ellison's original script would have been better- I'm not at all one of those people.

I do think that most of GR's significant contributions were very early in TOS, and in the popular consciousness he does get too much credit. People in the know give Gene Coon and DC Fontana a lot of credit, but both still deserve more than they get.

[Yukaphile]

I guess it's hard for me to credit such a rabidly misogynistic man, and one who might very possibly have been the one to rape Whitney. There's no way to be certain, of course, but I suspect it was him.

[Beelzquill]

I understand where you're coming from Yuka. One of my favorite movies is Chinatown, yet I hate Polanski for what he did. It doesn't change my opinion on his movies and that his vision contributed to the quality of those movies, but I understand.

[Beastro]

I'd argue the heart of Trek was the writers, because without them, well then, you wouldn't get enough good stories to keep it alive.

I'd rather argue that you that it's harder to keep a series coherent without an anchor to keep everything centered around. In Treks case, Roddenberry played that role and one area I can appreciate him for is in the world building department even if he could be too zealous about it sometimes.

A lot of shows lacked such centers and very much so back in Treks time. It resulted in actors often having to play that role refusing to act out parts of scripts or even rewriting them to maintain coherence, such as Robert Horton on Wagon Train who had to guard his character from the whims of whatever the current random writer had worked into the latest episode.

[clearspira]

I guess it's hard for me to credit such a rabidly misogynistic man, and one who might very possibly have been the one to rape Whitney. There's no way to be certain, of course, but I suspect it was him.

Yeah, but... that has nothing to do with his writing talent.

[Yukaphile]

And Roddenberry wasn't a good writer. And he was the heart... in the same way a rotten man has a rotten heart. Look at the kind of stories he bred in early TNG. That was his "purified" Trek out of jealousy over what two men who'd never even watched Trek had done with Wrath of Khan, created a film that the fans lapped up, that he absolutely despised, that was at the core of what people loved about TOS. That should tell you everything you need to know about him. I think it was always a matter of "saving" Trek from its own creator, because if he'd had his way, it would have died long before it hit its golden age in the 1990s.