tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2228174552203445896.post1064025435213199646..comments2024-02-05T01:33:59.164-05:00Comments on futureprobe: The Eisner-EPCOT Antipathy ExplanationDavid Landonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12909440700102911571noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2228174552203445896.post-21511500304009683132011-12-20T08:23:11.156-05:002011-12-20T08:23:11.156-05:00With Wrath of Khan the situation was different. Th...With Wrath of Khan the situation was different. The studio pretty much gave the project to Harve Bennett and Nick Meyer and gave them a pretty free hand to do what they wanted as long as they stayed within the budget. Eisner didn't involve himself with the creative process. At Disney, it seemed like the more involved he was, the worse things turned out.<br /><br />And no, I am certainly <b>not</b> equating Ray Bradbury with Gene Roddenberry. I love Star Trek, but let's face it: Bradbury is a prolific and celebrated author. Roddenberry only knew how to tell two or three different stories, and most of his stuff (especially after the 1960s) was hokey and preachy. Especially after Star Trek became a success, Gene's scripts were far more concerned with pushing his ideas about the future (and demonizing those things the disagreed with) than telling a good story.<br /><br />The core of Star Trek was his idea, but a lot of what it became is due to the contributions of people like Gene Coon, D.C. Fontana, Nicholas Meyer, and David Gerrold. Gene, however, reasoned that since Star Trek was "his", he was free to claim creative credit for all of it, even the ideas he had nothing to do with. Therefore, he almost always claimed ownership of any idea associated with Star Trek, and ignored the contributions of his co-creators.David Landonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12909440700102911571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2228174552203445896.post-15240492322570357172011-12-17T13:21:57.399-05:002011-12-17T13:21:57.399-05:00Great insight made all the more relevant by the fa...Great insight made all the more relevant by the fact that Wrath of Kahn was already out in 1982 so Eisner had already seen the results of adding more excitement into a story. <br /><br />Considering your recent article, are you in some ways equating Ray Bradbury with Gene Roddenberry?Omnispacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2228174552203445896.post-53991664951764334192011-12-17T00:36:24.252-05:002011-12-17T00:36:24.252-05:00And now we know that although Wonders has proven t...And now we know that although Wonders has proven to be a great success in EPCOT history, it's ended up nothing more than a setpping stone from greatness to (medical term pun) DOA.RabidLeroyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06573965837784134084noreply@blogger.com