Comments on: VegasCon07 – Justman Embraces Change

By: General Trelane - Retired

General Trelane - Retired — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 00:50:54 +0000

Star Trek (TOS) =Cheesy “Dinosaur?

(Cheesy “Dinosaur” special effects maybe….compared to the excellent Deep Space -9 or sometimes outstanding
TNG, even Voyager once in awhile …..and last and certainly least ……that enterprise show/thing with ….that time jumping bakula guy.

(TOS when compared to many current shows of that genra, even today still has/had the most noble and greatest best stories many times, and that’s thanks in no small part to a foward…seeing…team…of…visionarys…..an incredible team of writers and yes…even actors…..boldly going where no one had ever gone before in an adult space show at the time 1966-1969)

Thanks Bob Justman!

By: TrekLog » Blog Archive » Star Trek Vegas Con [2] - Bob Justman begrüßt Veränderungen

Sun, 12 Aug 2007 17:03:27 +0000

[...] Quelle: Trek Movie Report [...]

By: Stanky McFibberich

Stanky McFibberich — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:06:09 +0000

I have read Inside Star Trek 3 or 4 times, and I agree it is one of the best books about the show. I, too, feel it gives a balanced view about “who did what”, including Mr. Roddenberry.

By: Darth Ballz

Darth Ballz — Sat, 11 Aug 2007 07:46:22 +0000

No Gene Roddenberry, No Star Trek period!

Darth” Two Haging” Ballz

By: steve623

steve623 — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 23:22:18 +0000

I don’t think its a surprise to anyone that Gene has received – and taken – more credit for Star Trek’s success that he was probably due. That baby’s success was due to many, many fathers (and mothers). If the pendulum has swung a bit in the other direction in recent years, and the contributions of Justman, Coon, Fontana, et al, are being acknowledged and lauded, I don’t think its the worst thing. Even if their recognition is at the expense of Gene’s. There’s enough credit to go around, especially since Star Trek will always be seen through the prism of “Created by Gene Roddenberry”. I see no harm in the world having a clearer picture of who contributed what to the behemoth that Star Trek has become. And if people know that Gene had feet of clay, just like the rest of us, I don’t think that’s bad either. His accomplishments remain.

By: Dr. Image

Dr. Image — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 21:35:30 +0000

Anyone who’s into Trek should read INSIDE STAR TREK.
It’s the definitive chronicle of that era- a very different way of producing shows compared to today. Not surprising classic Trek was so great.

Wow. I wanna be in Vegas!
Keep the reports coming, Anthony!

By: Michael Hall

Michael Hall — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 20:54:06 +0000

Sorry, but having a reduced budget or Fred Freiberger as a producer doesn’t justify writing “Spock’s Brain” or “Spectre of the Gun” (though neither of those debacles take away from Gene Coon’s fine work during the previous two seasons). As for Justman, of course you’re correct that he made the best shows he could during the third year given what he had to work with, but that’s precisely my point. Justman was an excellent hand at keeping the show running smoothly, and he could even make valuable suggestions on scripts from time to time, but his job was mostly to take what the producers handed him and to get it filmed on time and budget. Good producer, good scripts; bad producer, bad scripts–and from 1964 until well into the show’s first season, that producer was Gene Roddenberry.

By: mb

mb — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 20:14:16 +0000

I don’t see where I’m being particularly harsh on Roddenberry in my post (I can’t speak for anyone else who has posted). From all I’ve read TOS was never a big rating hit at any point, and NBC was ready to cancel it after the first season as well regardless of anything Roddenberry did or didn’t do. There is no question that he was the creator of TREK and did the bulk of the producer’s chores from 1964 through the beginning of the first season.
I have no particular regard for Engel’s bio as 100% gospel truth, any more than David Alexander’s authorized book. I very much like Justman and Solow’s INSIDE STAR TREK and do not see how I in any way denigrated that work.
As for the third season, with a demoralized crew, poor producer (Fred Friedberger) and reduced budget, it would have been hard for anyone to do their best.

By: Michael Hall

Michael Hall — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:26:49 +0000

#s 1, 8, and 11,

To your great insight that any successful piece of popular entertainment owes its success to many creative individuals: gee, ya think? But the rest is unadulterated drivel. Roddenberry’s “antics”–I assume you’re referring to his sexcapades and drug use–had no more to do with Trek’s “demise” than Carl Sagan’s pot smoking was responsible for his failure to be inducted into the National Academy of Sciences. Engel’s “tell-all” was a piece of self-serving slop, while the Solo and Justman book, your interpretation to the contrary, was a well-balanced work that portrayed Star Trek’s creator like a human being in all his facets, good and bad.

That Gene had a messy personal life is by now legendary. That he was less than a saint should come as no surprise to anyone, his unintentional standing as the head of what almost became a humanistic cult notwithstanding. (It should be noted at the same time that many of his former colleagues seem to view their time spent with him with great nostalgia and affection–unlike, say, so many who have worked with Mr. Shatner.) And that his abilities to produce good Star Trek deteriorated over time is undeniable. But in truth, the same could be said for Gene Coon and Bob Justman, whose contributions to Trek’s third season were also sadly less than stellar.

When Roddenberry created Trek in 1964 he was a promising young writer/producer who had already won a Writer’s Guild award for his work. He gave Trek its setting, created its characters, and defined its humanistic outlook. Many people were responsible for fleshing out that vision, but to deny him the credit for what has made this program so enduring over the years is even more ridiculous than denying credit to those who he hired to assist him in bringing that vision to life. That’s just the history of the matter, and has nothing whatsoever to do with any cult of Gene Roddenberry.

By: Greg2600

Greg2600 — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 18:40:55 +0000

Bob Justman was an unsung hero in Star Trek history, no question. But Roddenberry was not the nuts and bolts producer of the show, he was a writer more or less. Plus he had to spend most of his time fighting the network due to all their idiotic standards and practices. Nothing has changed, the networks still behave in exactly the same fashion.