Why are the TOS movies better then the TNG movies?

[Shatner_Fan]

I read Star Trek Movie Memories again recently (a great book, highly recommended), and I believe one key reason the TOS movies were better than the TNG movies is good old fashioned CREATIVE TENSION. The book very candidly describes how it was a power struggle to make every single one of the 6 TOS movies. At various times, Roddenberry, Bennett, Meyer, Nimoy, Shatner and Paramount were all fighting amongst themselves. And fighting hard. They had knockdown drag outs, they cried, they cursed each other, they threatened to quit … and it was all because each one cared so much about the material and wanted to improve it. The end results of these clashes were usually better films.

By the time Berman and the TV guys took over, they were a cohesive, formulaic unit and, aside from a few memos from Patrick Stewart or Brent Spiner trying to get larger and better roles, I’m sure people rarely spoke up and said, ‘This is bullsh*t, we need to do something else, or I walk!’ It was like Lucas and his total control over the prequels – not enough people disagreeing!

[Dr. Crusher]

I have to agree with a comment above about how TNG did not translate as well to the movie screen as it functioned on TV. I think TNG was more about the combination of diplomacy, examination of culture and ethics, and action all together in an equillibrium. Movies always rely far more heavily on action. TNG as a TV series never did, and when the movies were written that way--as they naturally would be--the essence of TNG really did get very lost. The TNG films never managed to accomplish the balancing act of a good plot and moments of the character chemistry that we enjoyed in the TV series, but the TOS movies certainly did all of that very well.

[Xerxes1979]

Honestly I think think movies were just plain better in the 1980s.

Dozens and dozens of successful entries in all genres. Real gems that are still great to watch.

What are the memorable movies the 90s? I find them fewer in number the closer you get to the turn of the century. The modern action film is just quick cut ADHD garbage and the modern "comedy" is just gross out jokes.

[xortex]

Shatner_Fan wrote:

---

I read Star Trek Movie Memories again recently (a great book, highly recommended), and I believe one key reason the TOS movies were better than the TNG movies is good old fashioned CREATIVE TENSION. The book very candidly describes how it was a power struggle to make every single one of the 6 TOS movies. At various times, Roddenberry, Bennett, Meyer, Nimoy, Shatner and Paramount were all fighting amongst themselves. And fighting hard. They had knockdown drag outs, they cried, they cursed each other, they threatened to quit … and it was all because each one cared so much about the material and wanted to improve it. The end results of these clashes were usually better films.

By the time Berman and the TV guys took over, they were a cohesive, formulaic unit and, aside from a few memos from Patrick Stewart or Brent Spiner trying to get larger and better roles, I’m sure people rarely spoke up and said, ‘This is bullsh*t, we need to do something else, or I walk!’ It was like Lucas and his total control over the prequels – not enough people disagreeing!

I think the Shat described this as just greed and glory seeking, as if Shatner always wanted to be a writer/ director all his life or is any good at it. Same with Nimoy.

I think the thought this was all bullshit did cross Gates Mcphaden's mind once which is why she wasn't there for a few seasons. Who are you going to tell that to anyway? Rick Berman? He knew it was shit. How did you like his suits, though?

[JarodRussell]

xortex wrote:

---

By the time Berman and the TV guys took over, they were a cohesive, formulaic unit and, aside from a few memos from Patrick Stewart or Brent Spiner trying to get larger and better roles, I’m sure people rarely spoke up and said, ‘This is bullsh*t, we need to do something else, or I walk!’ It was like Lucas and his total control over the prequels – not enough people disagreeing!

I recommend reading "Fade In" by Michael Piller. There was an awful lot of disagreeing with Berman everywhere.

[Therin of Andor]

xortex wrote:

---

I think the thought this was all bullshit did cross Gates Mcphaden's mind once which is why she wasn't there for a few seasons.

Gates McFadden's contract was not renewed after Season One because Gene Roddenberry and Maurice Hurley did not like the direction her character had taken.

Behind the scenes, Hurley and McFadden had a rather strained working relationship. Her complaints were seen as "whiny" and her dismissal was meant to keep the rest of the cast in line. The actors had a catch cry on stage during Season Two, "Remember Gates!", if anyone complained. (The cast mentioned this at conventions.) After Diana Muldaur (Dr Pulaski) notified Paramount she would be unavailable for the first four episodes of TNG's Season Three (to film the reunion telemovie, "The Return of McCloud"), Hurley had left, Roddenberry had had a change of heart and Rick Berman invited McFadden back. Scripts were hastily revised to reinstate Dr Crusher.

[plynch]

Anwar wrote:

---

The TOS movies were used to revive what had been a canceled franchise, and they expanded on what little we had seen in the TV series. Plus, TOS only had 3 central characters so it was easy to keep that for the movies.

Also, the TOS movies were where these character finally started to show growth as characters that they never got to do in the TV series.

The TNG movies, however, couldn't handle the ensemble cast so well and TNG had pretty much run its course by then anyways. There was little purpose to the TNG movies to begin with (and Paramount made them on the cheap, too).

Frankly, the best ideas for TNG movies had already been done as TV episodes: Yesterday's Enterprise, Best of Both Worlds, heck even Descent.

Good one. Yeah, you got Spock growing a lot, obviously. Kirk struggling as a desk jockey, then feeling old, losing David, regaining Spock. That was indeed a nice expansion over the non-changing characters of 60s episodic tv. Never thought of that b4. Thanks.

[AggieJohn]

I think that the TOS movies took more risks and were more emotionally driven. When people say that the TNG movies, except for FC, were big made for TV movies its true. They were weak. Consider the destruction of the 2 Enterprises. I still get a little chocked up watching the NCC-1701 self-destructing. I mean it was turning death into a fighting chance to live. What was the NCC-1701 D's destruction? Poor planning and crew skill, an old BoP takes it out? That seemed like a screw you fans move. Like everyone was ready to move on the a new Enterprise. If anything they were right, the Enterprise E was the better ship in the movies considering FC. The A on the other hand never had the mystic the original had.

[Anwar]

Well, for the TOS Enterprise there was also the fact that up until WoK the ship never ever took visible damage like that. In TOS the ship was pretty much pristine all the time, so seeing it damaged and then destroyed like that was really an emotional blow.

The ENT-D though, we saw getting damaged all the time and destroyed in a few reset episodes as well so there wasn't so much of a punch there.

[CorporalCaptain]

Especially including the part immediately after, when the door is coming down and severing the engineering conduit, that whole scene is certainly among the most brutal Trek scenes ever. I think it's supposed to remind one of sailors getting sealed off and drowning when an engine room floods on an ocean-going vessel.

[KirksStuntMan]

It's all Patrick Stewart's fault!!! He should have worn a toupee!!! Didn't they have the Hair Club for Men in the 23rd century?!?! The Captain of the Enterprise can't be bald headed!!!! After looking at the hairless dome for years on television and now on the big screen, I just can't take it any more!!! ARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!

***Important TrekBBS Notice***

KirksStuntMan will be taking an extended vacation from this forum. He'll be staying in a nice soft room, with nice soft walls. He should return after his psychiatric therapy and medication take effect.

[22 Stars]

The TNG films fell into a pretty standard cookie cutter pattern. They ALL ended with older people fighting on scaffolding.

GEN - Picard/Kirk/Soran
FC - Picard/Borg Queen
INS - Picard/Ru'afo
NEM - Riker/Viceroy

There was no variation, at least FC had a great subplot about Zephram Cochrane. None of the films deviated from this bland, played out, low-rent formula.

The only part of Trek 09 that disappointed me was the choice to include a fistfight between Nero and Kirk. It's not necessary and it brings the film down. Imagine if Kirk had to fist fight Khan in II... it would not be held in as high regard.

[JarodRussell]

Huh, and there was no such thing in Trek 2009? Trek 2009 followed the very same formula of the TNG movies. Bad guy has doomsday device, and in the climax there are fist fights and shoot outs, and bad guy is stopped using violence.

[The Dominion]

22 Stars wrote:

---

The TNG films fell into a pretty standard cookie cutter pattern. They ALL ended with older people fighting on scaffolding.

GEN - Picard/Kirk/Soran
FC - Picard/Borg Queen
INS - Picard/Ru'afo
NEM - Riker/Viceroy

There was no variation, at least FC had a great subplot about Zephram Cochrane. None of the films deviated from this bland, played out, low-rent formula.

JarodRussell wrote:

---

Trek 2009 followed the very same formula of the TNG movies. Bad guy has doomsday device, and in the climax there are fist fights and shoot outs, and bad guy is stopped using violence.

I agree with these statements.

TMP, III, and VI were all about the plots, II had balanced elements of being an action movie and being a good Trek, and IV was a comedy. And then V is at best laughably ridiculous, but still didn't screw up pre-established continuity as bad as Generations.

[22 Stars]

JarodRussell wrote:

---

Huh, and there was no such thing in Trek 2009? Trek 2009 followed the very same formula of the TNG movies. Bad guy has doomsday device, and in the climax there are fist fights and shoot outs, and bad guy is stopped using violence.

Yeah, I hear ya about '09 but it did spend a lot more quality time exploring the characters than the TNG films for me. Kirk growing up vs. cooking eggs with Shatner. Spock rejecting the Vulcan Science Academy vs. Picard remembering he used to like to dance (badly).

While many movies have similar beats, what they choose to do with them makes a huge difference.

AND I might like to add that in '09, it was two, young, fit actors duking it out, not two older, non-action types fighting. That makes a HUGE difference to the regular audience, believe it.