Mania Exclusive Interview-Part II: Eugene Roddenberry - Mania.com



Mania Exclusive Interview-Part II: Eugene Roddenberry

23 Comments | Add

 

Rate & Share:

 

Related Links:

 

Info:

  • Series:

Mania Exclusive Interview-Part II: Eugene Roddenberry

Carrying the Torch of a Trek Nation

By Dan Madsen     March 25, 2009


Eugene "Rod" Roddenberry, Jr., the only son of Star Trek's late creators Gene and Majel.
© Mania.com/Robert Trate

 

Under Rod’s leadership, he expanded Roddenberry Productions, adding an e-commerce store and establishing a new mission for the company, to create new sci-fi content and make Roddenberry Productions the place where sci-fi begins. Along with his business/creative partner, Trevor Roth, Rod began developing new content aimed at moving the company into the digital age. Together the pair have successfully developed new properties across a variety of platforms, including popular web comic series, a new comic book franchise and development of film and television projects.

Especially close to Rod’s heart has been the documentary film project “Trek Nation.” Born out of a desire to get to know his father after his death, “Trek Nation” is a son’s quest to get to know his legendary father through the eyes of the fans that loved him. The film is set to debut sometime in 2009.

When not working, Rod’s passions turn to the oceans. Much in the same way his father explored the heavens with Star Trek, Rod has a devoted passion to exploring the great mysteries under the sea. Attempting to spread this passion, Rod established the Roddenberry Dive Team, with the mission of helping to educate, preserve and explore the oceans.

 
Dan Madsen: Rod, one of the things I have admired about you is that you have made a real effort to carry on your father’s legacy and respect what he accomplished.
 
Eugene Roddenberry, Jr. : Thank you. I can’t say that I know exactly what my father was thinking. I will hear interviews and things and fairly often I will think to myself, “Oh, that is exactly what I think!” He was such a reader – he knew so much. As far as his views on humanity, life, religion, our future, I hold those very near and dear. I think I have very many of the same views he did.
 
DM: What was your earliest memory of Star Trek?
 
ER: My earliest memory of Star Trek was going to conventions. I think I knew that my father was the producer of Star Trek but I didn’t even know what those words meant. I remember sitting in my father’s office bathroom. He had his 16mm projector and he would show the Star Trek bloopers on a little piece of white cardboard. It was literally 12 inches by 12 inches. I would sit there and giggle and laugh, as the guys would fall down the stairs and slip and stuff. That is definitely one of my first memories – sitting there and watching that. I still never grasped, though, that this is what my father did. I even less understood what Star Trek meant to the world. My first real comprehension of Star Trek’s impact would be much later in life at my father’s memorial service. A number of people went on stage at his service. I was 17 years old at the time. I had worked on The Next Generation as a PA for a couple of summers. I had also been to conventions. I knew there were devout followers. But I never connected with Star Trek. I even watched The Next Generation religiously when my father would bring home tapes on Thursdays. But I don’t know that I really got the metaphors and subtext that were in that show. They weren’t as prominent as they were in the original series but they were there.
 
   At my father’s memorial service a gentleman went on stage and talked about a letter my father got from a quadriplegic who was in a wheelchair. His parents had put him in a home because they couldn’t take care of him. For years, he contemplated suicide because he thought life was not worth living. Then Star Trek came on the air and presented a future where it had matured and he would not be such an outcast in society. He went on to credit my father and Star Trek and basically ended with him explaining that he was now in his late 40’s, married and had several kids. I don’t necessarily believe in life-changing moments, but that was one for me. That’s where I said, “Holy shit! I don’t understand. My dad did this?!” I just thought there were a bunch of crackpots running around in costumes.. But there was much more to it than that. I went to college and digested everything. I had the opportunity to work on Earth: Final Conflict and really proactively sought out to learn what Star Trek was and who Gene Roddenberry was and what made all these people so passionate about Star Trek. Those years, 1996 to 2000, are the years I learned the most about what Star Trek was by traveling to conventions and asking questions and watching episodes. I would look at a scene on Earth: Final Conflict where the lead guy dives through a window shooting his gun and ask myself, “Shouldn’t he knock first?” I watched Star Trek and there was always some sort of peaceful ending. Something just didn’t feel “Roddenberry.” I would go and talk to the crew and talk to the fans and say, “Yeah, I thought this was bullshit.”
 
DM: What do you share most in common with your dad?
 
ER: A lustful respect for women! (Laughs) I want to say all these philanthropic things like an open mind and a unique vision for the future but, like everyone else, I am a major hypocrite. I have this positive view on humanity and I do think everything will work out. I do think we are going to go through some rough patches. But I will wake up and have a shitty morning like anyone else where I hate everyone and everything. One of the struggles I have gone through my entire life is that we all have our own battles on our own levels of life – not that my life has been horrible in any way. Hearing how wonderful Gene Roddenberry was and what a genius he was – those are all true statements – but we all have to realize he was only human and there is another side to all these people who are visionaries and geniuses. While they are not rotten people they have their bad days and Gene Roddenberry was not always the wonderful happy genius.
 
DM: He told me one time that while fans put him on a pedestal and think he is perfect that he is still just Gene Roddenberry – warts and all.
 
ER: Yes, and I think that goes down to one of his philosophies about how we need to embrace our fears and acknowledge our weaknesses. To be weak and to make mistakes is to be human. That’s what Star Trek always said. The human factor is the most wonderful factor – warts and all.
 
DM: How would you describe your relationship with your dad?
 
ER: From birth to ten, he was the father figure. The guy I looked up to. He was larger than life. He was also an authority figure but he was my dad. He would talk to me about girls and things that a dad would talk about. But then I became a teenager and he became busy with The Next Generation and we were at odds. I was rebelling and we did not have the best relationship then. We were not at each other’s throats on a daily basis but there was definitely constant tension. That pretty much lasted right up to the point where I was 17 and he passed away. Unfortunately, my relationship with him from roughly 11 to 12 years old and on wasn’t that good.
 
DM: How do you see him now?
 
ER: It is much better. I am making a documentary film on him and have met a lot of people and had a lot of different thoughts and I have spent a lot of time dwelling on Gene Roddenberry. One of the things that I always wanted to do that has worked for me, and I hope it comes across in the documentary, was to really humanize my father. I spent a lot of time hearing people say, “The great Gene Roddenberry.” I really tried to come to grips with who Gene Roddenberry was. Was he the great Gene Roddenberry, visionary of the future or was he the guy I knew as the teenager? Of course, the answer is “both.” For a lot of people, the “warts and all” aspects of him are the things they don’t know about him. Essentially, his home life. For me, his “warts and all” were the things I had to battle with while everyone was saying how great he was. I saw him kind of the other way. I saw the human side of him. I had to come to terms with his “greatness” and love him and accept him for being human. One of the things that was revealed to me was that Star Trek and fandom were all his children. They really were. Star Trek was a family he created the way he wanted to. He had all the admirers and adulation. That was a slightly painful realization for awhile but then I really came to terms with it and it ended up being the realization that I have an amazing opportunity to know my father through so many different resources and I have millions of brothers and sisters around the world who can tell me great things about my father and I can learn from them. So the positive definitely outweighs any potential negatives I may have seen.
 
DM: Do you have a favorite Star Trek memory over the years?
 
ER: The people I have met throughout the world who have all had this common vision of the future is a wonderful thing. But I would have to say that a few years back, I briefly communicated with a lady who was born and raised in Iraq and she said that in the 70’s two episodes of Star Trek came on there and she had been a fan ever since. She said there are plenty of Star Trek fans in Iraq. I love the idea that in our two warring nations, so to speak, there are people on both sides who see this united future and don’t harbor resentment towards the other.
 
 
DM: What’s happening with your new documentary, Trek Nation?
 
ER: It’s about eight years in production now! We basically have 200 to 300 hours of footage. We started with a concept but not really a script, which would account for a little bit of this overtime. I ended up buying the rights from my producing partner about a year ago. We basically ended up producing about four or five different versions of Trek Nation and they all missed the mark. We had an amicable parting of the ways and I took control. I brought on a new editor and now Trevor Roth and I have been technically producing this with the new editor. We have a new solid rough cut that I finally think is there. I have been very apprehensive for giving a time frame because I feel the last few years I have been saying it would be released soon. But I feel we are closer than we ever have been. I feel we will see it released sometime this year. Ideally, we would like to get it out near the release date of the new movie. That will be the best market for it. I want to make sure it is on its own. It is not going to be one of the features on the back of the new Star Trek movie. It will be its own thing. I am really happy with it now. I grew concerned that it wouldn’t get to this point. One of the reasons it has taken so long is that simply I have never done this before. It is my first time. It is such a personal subject that it is so hard to be objective. It is so hard to watch a scene and know it is good for the right reasons. That has had a lot to do with these numerous versions of the film. We would have someone tell us that “this is not about Gene Roddenberry. This is about Rod Roddenberry.” We had a cut that focused too much on me – not necessarily from my arrogance but it just ended up that way. Instead of learning about Gene Roddenberry through his son’s eyes it became learning about the son and how he came to terms with his father’s love. Which, for me, in its own way was a beautiful story but was not what we set out to do and, to be honest, is not what the public would like. This is not a documentary about Eugene Roddenberry. That was a fine line to navigate. It was tough. We have always been shooting for a theatrical release and a theatrical release, in the best-case scenario, would be around two to five theatres around the country. That would just be for publicity. Then it will most likely go straight to DVD or Blue Ray. It was all shot in high definition.
 
DM: Was your mother aware that you were making this documentary?
 
ER: Yes, she was. I actually borrowed money from her in the beginning to start it off. We’re all flawed and while I wasn’t the best son my mother probably wasn’t always the best mother. She loved me and no matter fail or succeed would have continued to love me but I don’t know how supportive she was of this project. She would say, “Oh, it’s wonderful and it’s going to be great,” but I can also tell you other conversations I had with her where she would say, “Why are you wasting your time and money on something as ridiculous as this?” She definitely wanted me to be my father. She wanted me to be producing television and Star Trek. That’s for certain.
 
DM: Did you ever have aspirations of carrying on the Star Trek torch and producing your own version of your father’s show?
 
ER: It’s been a love/hate relationship of mine. There has been fear – there has been a little bit of everything. Part of me never wants to do anything with Star Trek because I don’t want to have the built-in criticism, not just from the fans, but also from myself trying to live up to my father. I have always had a healthy respect for Star Trek but also wanted to keep my distance. If I get into Hollywood, I am not going to go mainstream television. I don’t like working under the constraints of the current television industry. I will want to do something that is probably more low budget and independent. But my main focus and my main interest is the amount of technology and talent that is not recognized by Hollywood. If I can put together the right team of individuals with talent and get my hands on enough technology we could create a full one-hour television series that has almost studio quality and produce a series for the Internet or anywhere. I want to make the studios say, “Holy shit! They did this for how much?!” I am talking about doing a concept of my own. There are a couple of groups out there like New Voyages who have already kind of done this with Star Trek and they are the ones that have shown me that this can be done. While theirs aren’t great they are pretty damn good! They have shown me that the drive, the passion and the quality and determination are all there. We could do a serious one-hour pilot, with people giving up a lot of their time no doubt, to really blow the socks off of Hollywood. That is what I am excited to do. We could do this in a garage or a warehouse with a green screen, whatever, and make something very cool.
 
DM: Well, your dad made Star Trek on a shoestring budget and wowed people. I don’t mean to keep comparing you to your dad and have you live in his shadow.
 
ER: I am over the “shadow” thing. That was part of the whole Trek Nation thing. I have come to terms with that and I think it is a great thing. I am now honored by that as opposed to being scared by it or rebelling against it. Of course, whatever I do I want the fans to love it and feel the Roddenberry side of it. It will definitely deal with a future where humanity is working together. It won’t be a copy of Star Trek but it’s own thing.
 
DM: What is your opinion of the future of Star Trek?
 
ER: Long-term future I don’t think Star Trek will ever die. Star Trek is the modern day Shakespeare. Scholars will scoff at that comment and I am not necessarily comparing my father to Shakespeare but the collaborative effort of what Star Trek has become is of that caliber. I think for generations to come, whether it is on the air or not, it will be spoken about and used in conversation and be a household word. That is the worse case scenario. If Star Trek becomes the next Star Wars it might be around for a lot longer and on television and in movies and it might be great sci-fi. My only concern is that the philosophy gets lost on the young generation so that kids grow up learning about Star Trek as “the other Star Wars.” Either way, though, I think Star Trek will always be there. I think its philosophy will always be there – I just don’t know how ingrained into society it will be. I think we are at a crossroads to some degree. I think JJ Abrams has a lot riding on him whether he knows it or not. This next movie, I think, determines not just if Star Trek gets a television deal and a second movie but just what direction the Star Trek franchise will go. I have extremely high hopes for JJ and the next film.

COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 1 - 10 of 23
1 2 3 >  >>  
StarlightGuard 3/25/2009 6:16:39 AM

I need to comment on this properly, but my cat is climbing the windows for attention.

great article, great interview

this is the difference between Trek and Abram's Trek

monkeyfoot 3/25/2009 7:14:38 AM

"this is the difference between Trek and Abram's Trek"

StarlightGuard, I just can't see how you can say that. You can say that the trailers look like alot of just action & FX and that gives you some apprehension, but you, or anybody else criticizing the movie can't say much else. True, there are plot leaks about time travel and such but we don't know how it will be executed. We don't know if the storyline will follow Roddenberry's vision. In other words you don't know if Abrams Trek is really that different from Roddenberry's Trek . It's better to wait and at least see it or if you don't want to give it your money read some reviews and talk to some friends who have.

I think yur kitteh wants ta haz sum cheezburgerz

Hobbs 3/25/2009 7:54:56 AM

Starlight, I understand your concerns but until you see the final product you can't say its Star Wars.  To me it looks like a coming of age story. A wise ass, smart ass punk that has to finally grow up and become the Captain we all know and love.  If that's isn't a Star Trek theme I don't know what is.

I mean would you have rather the franchise stayed dead rather than giving it another shot?  To be fair, if enough of you tekkers would have shown up for the last ST movie with the next gen cast you wouldn't be getting a reboot. You would be getting another next gen film but the last one only made what 40 or 50 mil. 

From a profit side this was the only way to go.  They need to try and get new blood and risk losing the old fans because as I just stated...the current fan base are not enough to keep the franchise going. 

StarlightGuard 3/25/2009 8:25:49 AM

hey monkeyfoot (who I'm fortunate enough to say was my first friend on here)...

you know, a lot of the frustration towards Abrams Trek is cumulative and is, likely, unfairly thrown at it...

but the bit about Trek looking visually like Star Wars is unique to this vision

the genesis of my frustrations comes from Brannon Braga, one of the big shots on TNG and Voyager, and ultimately Enterprise

Braga was, more or less, a fine addition to TNG...no problems there, or on First Contact, or Generations...

he wasn't Michael Piller by any means, but he was fine...

my first real complaints about him started with a later episode of TNG in which the whole crew started de-evolving due to an abnormality in Barclay's "t-cell's" and such....Barclay turning into a spider was somewhat laughable

then he went onto Voyager...and for as much as he did well on there, there were other things that really screwed up the believability factors....."Threshold" was one of his episodes where Tom Paris uses trilithium crystals, I believe, and breaks the warp 10 barrier....and ultimately evolves into some kind of orange lizard...Janeway too, as he kidnapped her and she evolved the same way

and then the Doc just miraculously happened to de-evolve them back to normal

that's pushing the line a bit I feel....and humanity's evolutionary fate is to return back to the form of an orange lizard? really? I really don't like that idea, and Roddenberry would've hated it I feel

then there was Seven of Nine's parents encountering the Borg before the Enterprise did ("Dark Frontier") and so on...

Braga was really getting on my nerves in the 90's, yet the writing staff at DS9 was doing exceptionally well I thought...I've had no complaints about their use of Trek lore

then Enterprise came along...and Braga's total and complete need to revise an older generation of Trek really annoyed the hell out of me, plus Archer always reminds me of George Bush "in space," but Manny Coto's take on Enterprise seemed much more faithful to Trek as it should be and not what Braga was pushing it to be

now if all this hadn't happened...if Braga had been more....I guess "authentic" is a good term, then I wouldn't have all this leftover frustration aimed at Abram's version

but Enterprise looked aesthetically like every other sci-fi show on the Sci-Fi channel...and that was bothersome...it shouldn't look like everything else, it should be unique

then the trailer for the new show, where Kirk is a kid being chased by a cop...well that sequence makes me think of stuff like Minority Report and other sci-fi movies....

plus everyone worships Trek 2, 4 and 6 and that's because there was real talent there, Nick Meyer, who was an outsider, but he did understand Kirk and the historical references used to build Kirk, Meyer is also exceptionally competent and thoughtful

I'd really like to see some of the great writers like Peter David and the other novelists come up with a truly great story.....

somewhere around Trek 4 or 5 Harve Bennet wanted to do a Starfleet Academy movie with young actors...I was glad they didn't do that then either

besides all this "going backwards" is somewhat...well...actually Trek was about looking forward, not backward...

I'll give you this: no none of us have seen it, yes I'm likely having knee jerk reactions...after being burned by Braga, i've become awfully outspoken on Trek...

I'd like to see some kind of Voyager movie...or maybe a DS0 mini-series

but this just seems to me Paramount has sold out a damned good property...

but, as always, we'll wait and see

Hobbs 3/25/2009 9:27:14 AM

That's interesting starlight...nice insight.

I did give Braga blaim but I put most of it on Rick Berman. I thought he was the one who put the final nail in the coffin.

I gave Voyager just over two season then I gave up on it and never watched it again.  I was about to give up on Enterprise but like you pointed out.  Manny Cotto I think saved that show in the 4th season and if it would have been given a 5th I think that should would have taken off.  It was too little too late.

I'm keeping an open mind about the new movie.  It looks great to me and it still looks like Trek, not Star Wars but to each their own.  From a studio standpoint I don't think they care how many of the original fanbase they upset because they want a broader audience and they know they can't revive the franchise with the current fanbase they have.  Just my two cents.

 

hanso 3/25/2009 9:34:56 AM

Hobbs is right.

Check me out, I'm dropping $$ to see Star Trek, and I could care less about the franchise.  That has to be a good thing for Trek fans, at least you may get a new series or something if the movie is a hit.

StarlightGuard 3/25/2009 9:41:35 AM

a few of my other complaints on Voyager are more technical

1. the universal translator works instantly for all these new races we've never seen

2. the CGI that was used for some of the creatures was just terrible....this is Star Trek, not Sliders people

(I do like Sliders though)

3. Voyager did play it a bit safe I feel...I would've liked to seen over reaching story arcs, possibly modifying the ship as they went along, etc.

discovering some new propulsion systems or weapons would've been a great way to spice it up as well....

Voyager is worth watching...it did sort of even out in the 5 or 6th seasons, where it essentially became a mirror of TNG, but that's okay given how far they were into the journey

my only complaint about DS9 is simple -- they kept reusing stock footage, which annoys the hell out of me....they did it even more so in the last 2 years during the Dominion War

ah hanso, how's mrs. hanso? still calling you Edward I hope :)

all kidding aside, ultimately it's the coherent mythology I prefer to keep intact...even Enterprise showed Kirk's era ship in the style of TOS

 

StarlightGuard 3/25/2009 11:12:46 AM

see this is part of my point, Hanso's dropping ten bucks or so to see a movie based on a show he has no real interest in because it has action in it

and (just to give Hanso an open opportunity to mock me) this also mirrors his lack of interest in Twilight.....give him more violence and then he'll be happy.....but, my dear hanso, that's not what the story is...

hell he'd come after me with pitchforks and flaming torches if I took over the next Batman movie and made him for passive resistance...

outsiders coming in to a world where they really haven't got the mindset to write\direct something foreign to them can be disastrous

Hobbs 3/25/2009 11:20:54 AM

So then starlight, your answer is that you would rather the franchise stay dead rather than try to bring it back to life.

I'm not knocking you, I totally understand that. I feel the same way about Star Wars. I don't want any more of it, no clone wars, no live tv shows, movies...none of that shit.  Just let it rest in piece.  Though...I have to admit if someone other than Lucas came along like a Zack Snyder or Chris Nolan and wanted to make episodes 7-9 I would be curious.

hanso 3/25/2009 11:21:33 AM

Wrong, just cause it has action doesn't mean I'm interested in it.  I ain't paying to see Crank 2.

Star Trek, from the trailers looks cool to me and an entertaining time at the movies.  Plus it's got JJ Abrams directing and I like his Mission Impossible 3.  Not only that but Damon Lindelof is producing and I'm a huge fan of Lost.

And Twilight sucked, not only did it not any sort of meaningful violence but vampires glittering due to sunlight, climbing trees like monkeys and playing baseball mid afternoon is retarded.

1 2 3 >  >>  

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.

POPULAR TOPICS