TNG changes to TOS

[BillJ]

But that's what they did, isn't it?
Episodes tended to focus on a specific set of character. The big cast actually worked for me and I liked the episodes that involved all of them just as much as those that focused on one or two characters.
A large cast of characters works for me. It makes the world feel bigger and more complex. I prefer that over having the same 3 guys on screen all the time.
Shows like DS9 or even Lost are good examples of that. Tons of recurring supporting characters and also a large number of "main" characters that give the shows consistency.

I'm not saying the cast should've been smaller, I was fine with the size, especially for a show projected to go seven years. My peeve is cramming characters into episodes they really didn't fit in just to give them screen time. I don't know if they thought the audience would forget that LaForge or Troi or Riker or Crusher exist if they didn't make an appearance in every episode?

 

[Lance]

^ Such a situation can cause an unintended consequence however, especially in large ensemble formats, in that a character can disappear for a bunch of episodes at a time and then suddenly reappear (causing the audience to ask the reasonable question: "So where has he/she been these past few weeks?").

I do think in a mostly episodic format like TNG was it would've been fine to have skipped some of the cast from time to time. 'Mandatory Line Syndrome' is the worst example mostly because it leads to the need for useless filler scenes for no better reason than because they want all the regular cast to be featured. TNG often hid this well by making these fillers the much-loved poker scenes, where the mandatory line was at least character-building. But on other occasions, TNG hid it very poorly indeed, by suddenly having a cast member turn up when they had no need to be there, just so they could have their mandatory line.

 

[eyeresist]

Episodes tended to focus on a specific set of character. The big cast actually worked for me and I liked the episodes that involved all of them just as much as those that focused on one or two characters.
A large cast of characters works for me. It makes the world feel bigger and more complex. I prefer that over having the same 3 guys on screen all the time.
Shows like DS9 or even Lost are good examples of that. Tons of recurring supporting characters and also a large number of "main" characters that give the shows consistency.

I feel the opposite - in a large cast there are bound to be a few characters or actors I don't care for, and when they get their own episode it seems to me like a waste of time. Watching DS9 was certainly like that: "Oh no, it's a Jadzia story."

With TOS, you knew it would be about Kirk and a couple of friends (except for The Menagerie). You either liked them or you didn't, and didn't have to pick and choose.

 

[Louigi Verona]

Hm. Never noticed an unnecessary character. One could look at it differently, in fact. That in real life you rarely get only 2-3 people. In any more or less large company you have to interact with many people.

And so in a perfect world, being Riker, you might have wanted to interact with Picard and Geordy, solving a particular problem, but in real life you'd have to talk to much more people.

In fact, I have the opposite problem in TNG - why would senior officers end up doing a lot of the dirty work? Don't they have other personnel?

 

[Anwar]

Well, to be fair TOS was just as guilty of that too.

 

[Noname Given]

Well, to be fair TOS was just as guilty of that too.

Honestly, I'd need an example, because there were plenty of episodes in TOS where Uhura could/should have been at the comm station; but wasn't (Example: "The Doomsday Machine" - the comm officer who DID have some very necessary dialogue to the story was a never before seen 'Lt. Palmers'.)

Pretty much, if Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, Chekov, etc. weren't really required; they were not there.

The only time that usually happened on TNG was when a 'normally on the Bridge' cast member was off on a ground Away team, or something and the 'B' plot still had Bridge scenes.

 

[Christopher]

^That's because the supporting cast in TOS were only contracted for a limited number of episodes per season or were simply day players, while the entire main TNG cast were regulars contractually obligated to appear in every episode (which is why TNG had so many more names in the main titles than TOS did).

 

[Greg Cox]

For one thing when Paramount wanted to bring Trek back to the screen they went for a TOS reboot rather than a TNG one.

Has a spin-off series ever been rebooted?

The Bionic Woman . . . although maybe that isn't the most inspiring example.

And I'll bet you we get a Xena reboot eventually.

 

[Anwar]

You'd be surprised how many people don't realize Xena was a spin-off to begin with.

 

[suarezguy]

Another change I liked (although this may come from mostly watching TNG first) was that Crusher and La Forge were on the bridge less often than McCoy and Scotty had been and that the TNG crew used their conference room more often rather than having a lot of discussion or especially disagreement on the bridge, to me both increased the sense of professionalism.

 

[BillJ]

Another change I liked (although this may come from mostly watching TNG first) was that Crusher and La Forge were on the bridge less often than McCoy and Scotty had been and that the TNG crew used their conference room more often rather than having a lot of discussion or especially disagreement on the bridge, to me both increased the sense of professionalism.

Personally, I watch Star Trek to be entertained. So I never minded McCoy and Scott on the bridge nor did I mind there being open conflict. On the other hand, I hated whenever Crusher or LaForge were on the bridge, they were about as colorful as the beige painted walls.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Another change I liked (although this may come from mostly watching TNG first) was that Crusher and La Forge were on the bridge less often than McCoy and Scotty had been and that the TNG crew used their conference room more often rather than having a lot of discussion or especially disagreement on the bridge, to me both increased the sense of professionalism.

Personally, I watch Star Trek to be entertained. So I never minded McCoy and Scott on the bridge nor did I mind there being open conflict. On the other hand, I hated whenever Crusher or LaForge were on the bridge, they were about as colorful as the beige painted walls.

I was entertained by LaForge being on the bridge and occasionally - well, it was once - taking command. I didn't necessarily have any issue with Crusher visiting the bridge since it was usually, to my knowledge, when she had something to say personally and strongly to say to the captain which couldn't exactly wait.

 

[BillJ]

Another change I liked (although this may come from mostly watching TNG first) was that Crusher and La Forge were on the bridge less often than McCoy and Scotty had been and that the TNG crew used their conference room more often rather than having a lot of discussion or especially disagreement on the bridge, to me both increased the sense of professionalism.

Personally, I watch Star Trek to be entertained. So I never minded McCoy and Scott on the bridge nor did I mind there being open conflict. On the other hand, I hated whenever Crusher or LaForge were on the bridge, they were about as colorful as the beige painted walls.

I was entertained by LaForge being on the bridge and occasionally - well, it was once - taking command. I didn't necessarily have any issue with Crusher visiting the bridge since it was usually, to my knowledge, when she had something to say personally and strongly to say to the captain which couldn't exactly wait.

I was talking more about LaForge after the promotion to Chief Engineer that took him off the bridge. Season one Geordi seemed to have more life to him than Chief Engineer Geordi.

Both Burton and McFadden were good actors hamstrung by mediocre material most of the time.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Personally, I watch Star Trek to be entertained. So I never minded McCoy and Scott on the bridge nor did I mind there being open conflict. On the other hand, I hated whenever Crusher or LaForge were on the bridge, they were about as colorful as the beige painted walls.

I was entertained by LaForge being on the bridge and occasionally - well, it was once - taking command. I didn't necessarily have any issue with Crusher visiting the bridge since it was usually, to my knowledge, when she had something to say personally and strongly to say to the captain which couldn't exactly wait.

I was talking more about LaForge after the promotion to Chief Engineer that took him off the bridge. Season one Geordi seemed to have more life to him than Chief Engineer Geordi.

Both Burton and McFadden were good actors hamstrung by mediocre material most of the time.

Agreed...

 

[LMFAOschwarz]

I was talking more about LaForge after the promotion to Chief Engineer that took him off the bridge. Season one Geordi seemed to have more life to him than Chief Engineer Geordi.

Both Burton and McFadden were good actors hamstrung by mediocre material most of the time.

Dr. Crusher did seem a bit flat in character in season one. She definitely gained more personality after her return in season three.

Geordi was a bit different. In season one, he seemed like a great guy, someone you'd want to hang around with. After his promotion, he seemed to get more serious, and more prone to grouchiness. Maybe this was to reflect his more serious position, I don't know...but he definitely seemed to 'lose' something.

Riker was another one. Season two's Peak Performance made it a point to illustrate how Riker used his 'joviality' to create loyalty and top performance from the crew. Picard stated that directly. Then, along comes season three, and Riker now seemed to possess little humor at all, and was now quite serious, with humor being the rare exception. He was now arguably as prone to grumpiness as Geordi now was. In retrospect, it makes me wonder why the big deal was made of his command style in Peak Performance, since it directly dovetailed into the opposite of it's own point.

 

[Trekker4747]

"Commander Riker, you weren't like this before the beard!"

 

[T'Girl]

^ Maybe when Crusher was away at Starfleet medical, she started shaving her "beard."

.

 

[jimbotron]

It's funny that McFadden wanted the Crusher role based on the audition - the 'drunk' flirting scene with Picard from The Naked Now. She thought it was going to be a fun role. Little did she know scenes like that were few and far between, and most of the role was involved arguing and frowning.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

I was talking more about LaForge after the promotion to Chief Engineer that took him off the bridge. Season one Geordi seemed to have more life to him than Chief Engineer Geordi.

Both Burton and McFadden were good actors hamstrung by mediocre material most of the time.

Geordi was a bit different. In season one, he seemed like a great guy, someone you'd want to hang around with. After his promotion, he seemed to get more serious, and more prone to grouchiness. Maybe this was to reflect his more serious position, I don't know...but he definitely seemed to 'lose' something.

Riker was another one. Season two's Peak Performance made it a point to illustrate how Riker used his 'joviality' to create loyalty and top performance from the crew. Picard stated that directly. Then, along comes season three, and Riker now seemed to possess little humor at all, and was now quite serious, with humor being the rare exception. He was now arguably as prone to grumpiness as Geordi now was. In retrospect, it makes me wonder why the big deal was made of his command style in Peak Performance, since it directly dovetailed into the opposite of it's own point.

As aforementioned possibly in this thread or another, Geordi had potential. He seemed 'jovial'....excited....adventurous...romantic. Yet, later seasons they did make him boring, a joke with women, not that great in unarmed combat...

Riker seemed to always be a 'by the book' guy, who became even more of a 'by the book' guy in later seasons.

Even though the TNG films were pretty 'meh'....I did like Crusher's character. She was more 'alive;' less rigid.

 

[BillJ]

Riker was another one. Season two's Peak Performance made it a point to illustrate how Riker used his 'joviality' to create loyalty and top performance from the crew. Picard stated that directly. Then, along comes season three, and Riker now seemed to possess little humor at all, and was now quite serious, with humor being the rare exception. He was now arguably as prone to grumpiness as Geordi now was. In retrospect, it makes me wonder why the big deal was made of his command style in Peak Performance, since it directly dovetailed into the opposite of it's own point.

I believe it also gets a mention in season four's "Data's Day". But it wasn't how the character had been portrayed for a long while.

DATA [OC]: Commander Riker's easy going manner and sense of humour is fascinating to me. I believe it to be one reason he is so popular among the crew. It may also be partly responsible for his success in matters of love. There may be a correlation between humour and sex. The need for more research is clearly indicated.