Ian and the Okudas

When you take even the most fleeting of glances into the background of Star Trek there are always a few names which rise to prominence; among those has to be the pairing of Mike and Denise Okuda.

google images

Key contributors to the franchise for nearly 30 years, the Okudas have been involved with everything from The Final Frontier in 1989 through The Next Generation and its four movies as well as Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise. While they might not be involved with the '09 reboot, the pair have kept busy in Trekdom working on the remastered The Next Generation blu-rays and most recently the revised Encyclopedia and the Roddenberry Vault.

Mike and Denise were kind enough recently, while out promoting their latest ventures in Star Trek,  to take some time to answer our questions helmed by Ian Kimmins...

Do you think your work on the encyclopedia will ever be finished? With Discovery and Star Trek 4 on the way will we more likely see regular updates? Perhaps in 2020?

MIKE: That’s a good question. Obviously, we’d like for Star Trek and the Encyclopedia to keep going, but in the case of the Encyclopedia, it entirely depends on how well the latest edition sells. The publishing industry has changed a lot since the last edition of the Encyclopedia, so we’re just happy that they stepped up to the plate and we got to do this one.

DENISE: Books like the Encyclopedia are a huge leap of faith for a publisher, and HarperDesign really stepped up to the plate with this one. So the answer is, “We’d love to see it continue, but we really don’t know.”

When compiling the Encyclopedia which bits do you find the most interesting? What do you see as the biggest improvement/changes since the last edition? Was there something that had to be totally overhauled?

MIKE: The biggest single change, other than the added material, was the merging of the text of the 1997 edition with the 1999 supplement. In doing the merge, we discovered that a lot of entries had to be changed because material in the supplement caused the emphasis of the original entry to be changed. Of course, this process continued, to an even greater degree, with the new coverage added in the 2016 edition.

DENISE: I think that’s one of the things I found the most interesting. It’s fun to see all the various data-points for a character, established across many episodes, come together into a coherent whole. I love it when this shows the richness of a character that we’ve come to love, and how this can reveal a character’s overall story arc.

The Vault TNG?
-Wow just brilliant! Could the success of this be a catalyst for you to head off to see what gems are lying hidden from the movies or with next year's anniversary-

DENISE: That’s hard to say. The Roddenberry Vault was in some ways such an incredible stroke of luck, that Gene had held onto all that film, and for Majel, then later Rod, to preserve it all for literally decades. 

MIKE: It was such an unusual set of circumstances that led to the Roddenberry Vault. I don’t think that anyone was really aware that all this cool stuff from the original series was just sitting in storage.. We really haven’t looked into the films or the other series, so we really don’t have an answer.

trekmovie.com

You've had a busy few years with your work on The Original Series and The Next Generation blu-rays culminating with this year's release of the Star Trek Encyclopedia and The Roddenberry Vault. Having worked within the universe and being fans, how gratifying was it to revisit these especially coming to the 50th anniversary?

MIKE: Both the Roddenberry Vault and the new edition of the Star Trek Encyclopedia are our celebration of Star Trek. In the case of the Roddenberry Vault, it really was a dream come true, to get to see moments in time from the original series, which is really our favorite.

DENISE: The Vault is full of wonderful snippets, film that we had thought was lost forever. You get a sense of the actors’ working process, as when we see Leonard Nimoy working out his performance of Spock. With glimpses of the production crew, we have what we call the “fly on the wall effect,” a sense of what it must have been like to be on the soundstages when Star Trek was in production, all those years ago.

trekmovie.com

MIKE: We have a number of lines of dialog that didn’t make it into the final episodes, and in some cases, even partial deleted scenes and a couple of alternate endings. In a couple of cases, we found film of scenes in which the dialog was pretty much the same, but in which the actors’ deliveries were surprisingly different. I just love these. They’re an unexpected window giving us new insight into these episodes that we love so much.

Where you aware that there was "lost" footage still in existence or was it as big a surprise to you as it was us?

DENISE: We had always hoped that this footage would someday surface. For years, we asked friends, collectors, and studio people if they knew about any such material. And for years, there was nothing. But still, I kept hoping.

MIKE: I had pretty much given up when one day Rod Roddenberry contacted us. We went to an undisclosed film storage facility and we had to sign nondisclosure agreements. Then they showed us into a room with rows and rows of film cans and boxes on shelves. We looked at some of the labels, and we began to suspect.

DENISE: Then they showed us some of the footage, and our jaws dropped. As far as we
were concerned, this was the Holy Grail. Of course, at that point the challenge, from a filmmaking point of view, was to find a means to present the new footage.

MIKE: That’s where our friend, Roger Lay, Jr. came into the picture. Roger is an accomplished filmmaker whose work includes all of the amazing behind-the-scenes documentaries in the new Star Trek: The Next Generation Blu-ray remastered sets. He crafted a series of all-new documentaries to explore twelve featured episodes, as well as the overall series, showcasing the new footage. As longtime Star Trek fans, we’re delighted at some of the new areas he’s exploring in these pieces.

Did your work on The Original Series remasters have an influence on your approach to The Vault? Was it a driving force to get The Vault released?

DENISE: When CBS remastered The Original Series in HD, we all were delighted at how much excitement it generated in the fan community. I think that in some corners of fandom there was a tendency to think of the original series as that “old show,” maybe no longer of interest.

MIKE: Those beautiful new HD transfers revealed so much detail and richness and beauty that had always been part of the film, but had been lost in the old standard-def transfers. So working on The Original Series remastering project with David Rossi and the good folks at CBS gave us a renewed appreciation for the original Star Trek. Actually, the original series was always our favorite, but because we had reason to go back and study it so closely, it just renewed our love for it, which did indeed carry over onto the Roddenberry Vault.

With the release of this new footage is the journey with The Original Series complete? Is there possibly anything new it can give us for the next fifty years?

MIKE: Who knows? Who would have predicted that The Roddenberry Vault would ever become a reality? Certainly not us. So we’re looking forward to being surprised as much as anyone.

As the authors of the Encyclopedia would you consider this new footage canon? Or how do you balance it?

DENISE: We don’t really use the term “canon” in the way that it’s generally used in fandom, that is, to describe story elements with which future writers, producers, and directors must remain consistent. The reason for this, of course, is even though our writers generally have great respect for Trek’s backstory, you never know when the next story or script will require something to be tweaked or “discovered” for dramatic reasons. And as storytellers and filmmakers, that’s their prerogative.

MIKE: When we wrote the Star Trek Encyclopedia, for the most part we tried to stay fairly strictly with material from finished, aired episodes and movies. It was our hope that the book would serve as a reference to fans and writers for the source material, the episodes and movies themselves. The newly-discovered material in The Roddenberry Vault was extremely cool, but in the majority of cases there wasn’t enough film to properly re-create an entire scene with wide shots and closeups and all the elements that you need. This is one of the reasons we didn't attempt to cut together extended versions of the episodes. So while your mileage may vary, we don’t generally consider the new Roddenberry Vault footage to be officially part of the episodes.

Finally what does 2017 hold for yourselves? 

M: We have some things coming up that we can’t talk about yet. There are also a couple of non-Star Trek television and film projects for which we’re doing graphics. There’s some small NASA-related projects, including one that’s almost finished. Those are always fun.

DENISE: The thing is, we’ve been on a crazy busy schedule for the past few years. Between The Next Generation remastered, the Star Trek Encyclopedia, Sully, and the Roddenberry Vault, we’ve been working seven days a week for longer than we’d care to admit, so we hope we get a little time to decompress.

MIKE: But we’re also looking forward to the next thing. Going boldly.

Live on YouTube
Like our page on Facebook 

Follow us on Twitter
+1 us on Google+

Add us on Tumblr

Join the conversation on Star Trek: Risa

The True Story: Star Trek

True, probably. The full story? No.

Thanks to the wonders of SKY On Demand I caught up with this Channel 5 special last night (13th May 2013). Originally aired on the Discovery Channel earlier this year (January 5th 2013) and clearly positioned at a time when interest in the franchise is beyond its peak, The True Story offered us a chance to see what made Star Trek a reality back in the 1960's. Hyped up as a "Documentary (that) reveals how the original Star Trek series almost didn't take off..." (UK Daily Express headline) I should've realised the error of my ways before settling in for an hour.

While BBC 2 decided to show a repeat of The Star Trek Story on Saturday night (11th May 2013) at least this was a new(ish) programme. The problem was that unless you've lived under a rock for the last 50 years the story of Star Trek's conception is hardly mind-blowing since it's been out in the open for decades: pilot one failed, got recommissioned for pilot two, Roddenberry got to keep Spock and had to lose everyone else, there you go, all done in two lines.

Discovery Channel

There of course had to be more to it than that considering we had a full hour (minus adverts) to fill here - and there was with mixed results. Retelling the story through the use of actors, the history of Star Trek's creation focuses on Herb Solow and Roddenberry with the occasional swerve to feature Matt Jeffries and Bob Justman. Jeffries ultimately should be credited with the look of the series while Justman kept the ball in play.

What I was perhaps aware of, but not THAT aware of was how little Roddenberry began with , how little he seemed in control and that the bulk of what we saw on the screen was created by others (the obvious example being the USS Enterprise herself). Roddenberry had a lot of self-belief and that's evident here - mistresses (all bar two female guest cast apparently), publicity campaigns, standing with the fans to help save the series - The True Story stands Gene out as a hero who loved the attention just as much as he loved the series he created. Indeed he preferred "creator" to "producer". 

Quite an amazing journey considering he pitched the show from a piece of A4 and was not the greatest orator yet managed to convince Herb Solow to help him get not just one but two pilots commissioned. Solow is quick to point out that he had to give Gene a lot of help to pitch to NBC and that it's not Roddenberry who deserves the credit overall. Sadly we can't get the other side to this story since Roddenberry died in 1991. 

At least they ensured that, while he might have been a handful to work with, Roddenberry's vision was noted and spoken of. His all-consuming passion helped bring the series about and that's something that should never be forgotten no matter what "bad press" may exist in regards to some of his other questionable activities away from the limelight of Star Trek. 

digitaltrends.com

There were two massive chunks I was surprised were omitted from the documentary and as a casual viewer these would probably have bee  appreciated. From a fan perspective it's two massive gaping holes that should not be there. Firstly, there's no mention of the situation Roddenberry found himself in for the third season following Star Trek's revival and how Fred Freiberger took on the running of the show. Secondly, the transition to the big screen completely jumps over the reaction to Star Wars as well as the fact that the franchise had originally been planned for a small screen comeback with Star Trek: Phase II rather than a multi-million dollar movie. Both factors were key in the history of the programme but neither was covered even in a passing, throwaway comment. The birth of the conventions and the renaming of NASA's space shuttle as Enterprise meanwhile are ticked off as you would expect with the former getting nowhere near the appreciation it warrants as a subject. I thought perhaps another 30 minutes to an hour on this show might have added more depth and detail particularly in this area.

astrobio.net

Luckily the programme is saved by the diversions into the real world by some of its contributors namely Andre Bormanis who acted as science advisor to the later generations of the franchise as well as contributions from CERN in Switzerland in regards to anti-matter. It adds weight to the story and shows that Star Trek and Roddenberry had always attempted to keep an eye on reality and that whatever was featured was truly possible. Warp speed could indeed happen and transporters are even now being tested in the smallest ways to get particles to mimic each other. 

There were also examples cited of 3D printers replicating body parts in fine detail, the work of IT experts in the field of android development which all backed up that science and Star Trek were truly linked and influenced each other. The only scary thing is when the scientists involved in these experiments work out how long it would take to beam a human from one point to another...put it this way you'd be long dead and dust before it got halfway through the process. What I would also add is that while these diversions were great and added another layer to the mythos, were they really necessary and did they help tell the true story? I would argue no. In fact they removed time that could have been dedicated to the story and maybe some bits we hadn't heard before from one or two more people associated with the series.

Discovery Channel

OK, so The True Story wasn't that bad and at least it managed to retell an oft-told tale in a new way with live-action "reconstruction". The shame was the shocking limit of actual Star Trek footage and first-hand accounts. The only original cast member to provide any insight into Roddenberry is Leonard Nimoy while fandom get Gene's son, Rod along with Bjo and John Trimble - again. It's  real shame that there's not more diversity in the first hand accounts because, frankly, we've heard it all before from these familiar faces. Not only that but we're only treated to clips from The Cage, Plato's Stepchildren and The Motion Picture to fill out the onscreen story and this really was a let down. Is that all the producers were allowed? While there are some glaring omissions, we're still reminded of Jeffrey Hunter's decision to quit before Where No Man Has Gone Before filmed. Two episodes and some clips from the first movie though is pitiful - and additionally they even managed to use the promotional poster from pre-pre-release with the conceptual Enterprise in relation to the latter (below right). 

You could see that the effort was there and this was a valiant attempt to retell and retread some old paths with a twist but ultimately it was a bit of a letdown. Ideal timing on the TV thanks to the release of Star Trek Into Darkness but more relevant footage and interviews would have been appreciated. In fact there were no clips post-The Motion Picture which really missed out on some opportunities to talk about the first six movies and the way in which the TV series developed. The only real lip service the 79 episodes got was from the interracial kiss from the third season's Plato's Stepchildren. Another tragedy was the referencing to the 1974 Voyager probe - which was not the same one which was featured in the first movie. Whoever did the research for this show didn't do it that precisely and for a moment when it got mentioned I was scratching my head trying to work out what had gone on.

While a bit of a let down, new fans who have just sat through 133 minutes of JJ Abrams' re-imagining will probably find this of interest. Those people of a more discerning ilk and a greater knowledge of the series might wish to avoid it it they spot it in the schedules in months to come. I would suggest that you seek out either William Shatner's The Captains or Rod Roddenberry's Trek Nation if you're looking for something with considerable more meat on the bone. While they offer little into the actual history of the show, their insight and anecdotal nature provide much more detail into the world of the franchise in front of and behind the screen. This on the other hand is akin to skim-reading the back cover of an autobiography - and one chapter of it at the most.