Was the TNG crew unlikable in the first two seasons?

Was the TNG crew unlikable in the first two seasons? This review by sfdebris of Peak Performance, he mentioned that if this episode was in season 3, than it would have better, because he argued the characters were more humanized in the third season. It did seem like the crew was more arrogant in the first couple of seasons and Picard almost always seemed to be a bad mood. I do think the characters found their footing in the third season. There were some episodes in the first two seasons where the characters were likable, but there were lot of episodes from those seasons where they were not.

http://www.sfdebris.com/videos/startrek/t147.php

 

I don't think it was much about being unlikeable. Much more a case of actors and writers trying to figure the characters out as they went along.

One thing about all the characters in the first two seasons was a noticeable emphasis on these being "future" people. Many times they'd express disdain and bewilderment for things of "our" time, to illustrate how advanced and evolved they were. Maybe this made them seem unlikable.

From season three on, the characters took on a much more contemporary feel and perhaps they began to seem more familiar to us, and more likable?

 

I wasn't very favorably impressed with the TNG crew when it first launched. My initial impressions, after the first few episodes, as best I can recall:

Picard. He was supposed to be a great captain, but I didn't see much evidence for that on the screen. Whenever faced with adversity, he tended to fall into a sad, brooding funk, as if overcome by his disappointment that the universe had once again failed to live up to his ideals. Then he'd try to surrender his ship.

Riker. Alternated between being a stiff, wannabe hard-ass to the crew and a smarmy sycophant to Picard. In fact, the only real evidence I got that Picard was supposed to be a great captain was that Riker kept telling him he was.

LaForge. Seems they tried to start him off as another incarnation of Roddenberry's stock "Jose Tyler"-type character, the excitable, enthusiastic youngster. "Oh, I see where you're goin', Commander! Yeah! Woo-WHEE!!" Thankfully, he calmed down in later seasons.

Yar. Just bad casting, really. Denise Crosby does not project "tough." At all.

Worf. Basically portrayed as a joke. For God's sake, he sees an enemy alien on the bridge viewscreen, so he leaps over the horseshoe and pulls his phaser on him.

Troi. "Just oozing angst (was she an early emo?). Plus, Roddenberry's steadfast fondness for a swooning, lovesick hottie pining for the hero was already old by this time.

 

Was it Season One? I forget, at this particular moment in time, but in that Q episode where Q gives Riker the power of Q, I really couldn't stand Riker. He was made to act like such a smacked ass it remains the one and only TNG episode I do not watch, on purpose. Outside of this, in the episode THE HAVEN, which I happen to like, actually, there was so little tension between Riker and Troi's boyfriend that it seemed kind of unnatural. Other episodes, particularly in Season Two, Riker seemed very likable, to me. Like in MEASURE of a MAN. Riker's put in a rotten position and Frakes really makes you sympathize with him, the whole time, despite the hell he's putting Data through. I happen to like the first two seasons of TNG, very much. They are so unusual to anything else I've ever seen in any of the STAR TREK spin-offs. It's very refreshing, actually, because once the series settles in, there's a sort of predictability that the first couple seasons were, fortunately, quite free of.

 

So basically, Riker didn't change in seven years?

 

Does no one here love TNG ... as much as I?

 

He got slightly better. But, yeah, he pretty much made a career out of kissing Picard's ass.

 

To paraphrase a philosophy teacher I've had in college, Cyrano should have realized that Roxanne farts as anyone else.

 

I thought the crew was more likeable in the first two seasons vs. what came later.

 

Their unlikability peaked in Pen Pals. That stupid argument about not saving an alien race from extinction was lame and a low for Star Trek as a whole. Only for the fact that the little girl called out Data's name for help did that entire civilization survive. What self-righteous a-holes.

It didn't get that bad again until season 7's Homeward with a very similar dilemma with the crew once again taking the "meh, sucks for them" approach. It look Worf's brother being insubordinate to save people from meaningless death.

 

Believe it or not, Pulaski managed a great deal in helping me like everybody else better than I had

 

I thought season two was when the TNG crew were at their most relatable. Pulaski seemed like a real person, Riker made eggs and it was a fucking disaster, and they went a full ten minutes without condemning someone for not living up to their "evolved" human standards.

 

From where I sat, it wasn't so much that the characters were unlikable. They were BORING.

 

That was a problem that pretty much plagued the series its entire run.

 

I actually prefer early grumpy won't-take-any-shit "Shut up, Wesley!" Picard to the later genial-smiles-for-everyone "Counselor, so nice to see you" Picard.

 

I'm with you 2takesfrakes though I was a kid watching TNG. Every part of it blew my mind.

 

You know, it *is* possible to like a show and critique or criticize parts of it, and in many cases, it increases one's appreciation of the rest of the show or its development. After all, this thread is on a board where watching every episode is almost a prerequisite to commenting. Even the cast and crew have been critical of certain things here and there, and we love them anyway. Nothing is perfect -- if anything, imperfection shows complexity.

 

Blasphemy!

 

I think it just took them the first two seasons to really get some of the characters clearly defined. In addition, the overall feel of some episodes (especially in season 1) was more like TOS (which is not bad). It just took them some time till they got it right.