Gene Roddenberry - Was he a nutter? AKA did he get unfair credit for Star Trek's success?

The more I read/hear about Gene Roddenberry, the less-inclined I am to
think he deserves the credit for Star Trek. He deserves *partial*
credit at best:

JEDIDIAH...

Also keep in mind that his concept had already pretty much been
completely implemented in Hollywood already. Update the set design on
Forbidden Planet a little bit and you would be hard pressed to tell it
from the Star Trek Franchise.

Forbidden Planet likely also was derivative as well (perhaps
even taking from literary sources).

El Puerco...

I've always heard that Forbidden Planet was The Tempest...in SPAAAAAACE! I
always assumed that was intentional. Is there some controversy about that?

JEDIDIAH...

Well, there's no cult of "whomever made that movie" making into the
producer into something more than he was.

pv+usenet...

Not that I've heard - the lifting of some of the story themes was entirely
intentional as far as I know. *

Ubiquitous...

Say what you want, but he was prescient in basing the Klingons on
Moslems.

David Johnston...

Which of course he didn't.

Original STAR TREK

Gene deserves credit for the idea of Star Trek... an exploration ship
of multi-racial crew, including a female First Officer, and an alien.
Brilliant way to be forward-looking.

But when it comes to the day-to-day running of the show, Gene was
largely absent. So who deserves the credit for the great stories &
hiring great writers? GENE COON.

.

Fast-forward to Star Trek TNG

Roddenberry took the reins, and he produced the half-good/half-bad

JEDIDIAH...

[deletia]

Star Wars suffered from the same problem: an undiluted artistic
vision.

videonovels...

Ahhh, at last someone agreeing with me.

Ken from Chicago...

I thought it was common knowledge the problems with early TNG and prequel SW
was the LACK of editorial oversight. Kinda like Prince's movie after PURPLE
RAIN: UNDER THE CHERRY MOON or much of the comics published by Image Comics
in the 90s, or many of the Big Event comics published by DC and Marvel in
the 2000s.

EDITORS are there for a reason--or should be.

season 1. Most viewers think it's too preachy & unrealistic with
flawless human beings. Then Roddenberry took FIRM control and
churned-out the abysmal season 2 with such winning lines as "Human
children don't cry when their mothers die." Um. Yeah. (Sounds like a
nutter to me.) And still carrying that season 1 tendency to be
preachy/perfectionist.

Season 3, Rick Berman takes over due to Roddenberry's illness/inability
to work. Result? The best season TNG ever produced. Later seasons
4/5/6 also outshone Gene's abysmal seasons 1/2. Thanks Rick; you saved
the show from premature boredom & cancelation.

.

So who truly deserves the credit? Roddenberry for his IDEA of star
trek. But Gene Coon & Rick Berman deserve the most credit for taking
charge and actually making the first two shows, TOS and TNG, successful
and entertaining.

.

David Johnston...

Of course he was responsible for it all. But he wasn't responsible
for all of it and his product was better when he didn't have a free
hand with it.

(DS9 was successful because of Ron Moore/Ira Behr.) (Voyager was
initially good because of Michael Pillar, but after he left was ruined

pv+usenet...

Proof that no matter how good you are at polishing turds, the end product
is still just a shiny turd. *

by Brannan Braga.) (Enterprise== Brannan Braga's dungpile.)

Ken from Chicago...

So how does delegating make Gene a "nutter"?