TNG Actors Were Cast Incorrectly

[Admiral Shran]

I have slowly come to the conclusion over many years that Stewart was horribly miscast in TNG. The more I watch TNG, the less convincing the man becomes to my eyes. Leader of men? I think not. Engaging personality? I think not? Dominant and persuasive? No.

He is horribly over-qualified within TNG cast, this has the effect of making him stick out like a sore thumb to the point where it just looks 'hammy', the other casting choices for the main players, with the exception of Spiner were also poor. Frakes was just dreadful, wooden and stilted in his delivery. McFadden was horrible. Burton?> Anyone notice him really? Dorn, a variation on a theme.

I think TNG could have been so much better than it was if it had been cast correctly, I can't deny it was a success but I believe that this was despite the casting.

The more I see these days, the stronger the conviction grows.

I'm confused here. Do you think the role of Picard should have gone to a less qualified actor in order to balance out with the rest of the cast, who I agree are uneven? Or is it that you think the Picard character is simply not a convincing captain and leader of men?

In either case, I have to disagree with you. I think Patrick Stewart was an amazing choice for the part. Like others have said, he basically carried the series and made it the success it was. As for a leader of men, Picard is exactly what I think of as a capable and inspiring leader. He's no Kirk, but when necessary he's just as capable of doing the loud bombastic things that Kirk did.

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

I have slowly come to the conclusion over many years that Stewart was horribly miscast in TNG. The more I watch TNG, the less convincing the man becomes to my eyes. Leader of men? I think not. Engaging personality? I think not? Dominant and persuasive? No.

He is horribly over-qualified within TNG cast, this has the effect of making him stick out like a sore thumb to the point where it just looks 'hammy', the other casting choices for the main players, with the exception of Spiner were also poor. Frakes was just dreadful, wooden and stilted in his delivery. McFadden was horrible. Burton?> Anyone notice him really? Dorn, a variation on a theme.

I think TNG could have been so much better than it was if it had been cast correctly, I can't deny it was a success but I believe that this was despite the casting.

The more I see these days, the stronger the conviction grows.

I'm confused here. Do you think the role of Picard should have gone to a less qualified actor in order to balance out with the rest of the cast, who I agree are uneven? Or is it that you think the Picard character is simply not a convincing captain and leader of men?

In either case, I have to disagree with you. I think Patrick Stewart was an amazing choice for the part. Like others have said, he basically carried the series and made it the success it was. As for a leader of men, Picard is exactly what I think of as a capable and inspiring leader. He's no Kirk, but when necessary he's just as capable of doing the loud bombastic things that Kirk did.

Interesting point.

Perhaps the cast were mis-matched? I don't think Stewart was cut out for the command role, he seemed to lack the gravitas required, was that bad writing or poor delivery, not sure to be honest?

Now I know that will attract a fair amount of criticism but as Shakespearian actor's go, no-one had heard of him prior to the TNG role. There's a good reason for that, there were better actoirs out there doing similar work.

Having seen Stewart live on stage, I suspect poor writing might be to blame along with a thespian's distaste for the material at hand but he still isn't a Star Trek Captain who, IMO, can carry the show along with the rest of an admittedly poor cast with limited acting ability.

I'm just not feeling it.

 

[MikeS]

That's Sir Patrick to you.

You're definitely on your own on this one I'm afraid.

 

[Corwwyn]

Interesting point.

Perhaps the cast were mis-matched? I don't think Stewart was cut out for the command role, he seemed to lack the gravitas required, was that bad writing or poor delivery, not sure to be honest?

Wait a minute...am I reading you right? You think he seemed to lack gravitas? Ohhhh Kaaaay...

Now I know that will attract a fair amount of criticism but as Shakespearian actor's go, no-one had heard of him prior to the TNG role.

Well...I thought he was excellent in Excalibur and Dune, as well as the Derek Jacobi tv series: I, Claudius. His portrayal of Gurney Halleck(sp?) seemed so close to how I imagined him from the book it was eerie.

When you suggest "no-one" had heard of him prior to the TNG role, don't you really just mean "you" hadn't heard of him?

There's a good reason for that, there were better actoirs out there doing similar work.

That may be your opinion, and you might be right, but still...

 

[Balrog]

Perhaps the cast were mis-matched? I don't think Stewart was cut out for the command role, he seemed to lack the gravitas required, was that bad writing or poor delivery, not sure to be honest?

Well, it was certainly not poor delivery. The first season had some of the most stilted dialogue of any Trek series, and Stewart was really the only one who managed to consistantly deliver it without making it sound horrible.

I still have to go back to, "Picard isn't the character you personally wished he was" position, PoW. I remember when TNG started, Staewart's Picard was a shock. He just wasn't the dynamic leader like Kirk. But the more I watched, the more I came to like the direction the writers and actor were taking the character.

 

[USS Intrepid]

Perhaps the cast were mis-matched? I don't think Stewart was cut out for the command role, he seemed to lack the gravitas required, was that bad writing or poor delivery, not sure to be honest?

Now I know that will attract a fair amount of criticism but as Shakespearian actor's go, no-one had heard of him prior to the TNG role. There's a good reason for that, there were better actoirs out there doing similar work.

Having seen Stewart live on stage, I suspect poor writing might be to blame along with a thespian's distaste for the material at hand but he still isn't a Star Trek Captain who, IMO, can carry the show along with the rest of an admittedly poor cast with limited acting ability.

I'm just not feeling it.

Then that's your personal issue, and one not apparently shared by the majority of people.

There are far more hugely talented actors that are rarely, if ever, heard of. Obscurity is no measure of talent.

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

Perhaps the cast were mis-matched? I don't think Stewart was cut out for the command role, he seemed to lack the gravitas required, was that bad writing or poor delivery, not sure to be honest?

Now I know that will attract a fair amount of criticism but as Shakespearian actor's go, no-one had heard of him prior to the TNG role. There's a good reason for that, there were better actoirs out there doing similar work.

Having seen Stewart live on stage, I suspect poor writing might be to blame along with a thespian's distaste for the material at hand but he still isn't a Star Trek Captain who, IMO, can carry the show along with the rest of an admittedly poor cast with limited acting ability.

I'm just not feeling it.

Then that's your personal issue, and one not apparently shared by the majority of people.

There are far more hugely talented actors that are rarely, if ever, heard of. Obscurity is no measure of talent.

Guys, to clear up your misconceptions about my perspective, I am not attempting to introduce an argument that will convince you as to my point of view, it is merely a held opinion I''ve had for some time.

I think he 'shouts' when gravitas is required, his voice is almost 'forced' dare I say it at this point. His best moments are when softer tones are required and he's not interacting with lesser actors on the same screen for a prolonged scene. He's better with other Shakesperian types because they give him something to work with. The limited ability of his fellow TNG players must have been galling in the extreme as it limited his ability to 'buzz' off of them. But he needed to get paid.

I see no warmth betwen him and his fellow players, there is no connectivity between him and Frakes on screen so far as I can see and it's all very 'forced'. Wooden almost.

Sorry.

 

[KingstonTrekker]

Well, you are entitled to your opinion of course. Mind you, your opinion on this topic puts you in the VERY small minority on here.

This thread has basically become pointless -- none of our arguments have convinced you and your opinion on this topic will never sway our views.

 

[CaptainStoner]

He sounds as if he's basing his opinion on having seen a handful of S1 episodes at the most.

 

[DevilEyes]

Perhaps the cast were mis-matched? I don't think Stewart was cut out for the command role, he seemed to lack the gravitas required, was that bad writing or poor delivery, not sure to be honest?

Patrick Stewart's gravitas, commanding presence and convincing delivery is what IMO raised the quality of TNG at least a few notches, and managed to sell even the cheesiest possible morality speeches. Without him, I doubt many people would have stuck with TNG during its awful first season and not much better second season. And I'm saying this as someone who tends to be pissed off by TNG's preachiness and the moral superiority of the captain. That I still like Picard is a testament to Stewart's acting, he was actually able to make you believe in Picard as this great, deeply ethical leader of men, with a lesser actor it would have all probably fallen apart.

 

[Anji]

Not make Patrick a member of the TNG cast??? It's like a Happy Meal without the toy. Stewart was the best part!

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

Well, you are entitled to your opinion of course. Mind you, your opinion on this topic puts you in the VERY small minority on here.

This thread has basically become pointless -- none of our arguments have convinced you and your opinion on this topic will never sway our views.

Yeah, you are right. I should only post where I agree with a majority view.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Well, you are entitled to your opinion of course. Mind you, your opinion on this topic puts you in the VERY small minority on here.

This thread has basically become pointless -- none of our arguments have convinced you and your opinion on this topic will never sway our views.

Yeah, you are right. I should only post where I agree with a majority view.

Well, this is a pretty unproductive topic.

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

Well, you are entitled to your opinion of course. Mind you, your opinion on this topic puts you in the VERY small minority on here.

This thread has basically become pointless -- none of our arguments have convinced you and your opinion on this topic will never sway our views.

Yeah, you are right. I should only post where I agree with a majority view.

Well, this is a pretty unproductive topic.

I don't think so, it's an opinion I hold and one I'm willing to discuss. I'm not the one saying I won't discuss it simply because the majority don't agree.

Not one of you 'fans' mentioned the Inner Light or Yesterday's Enterprise, both good Picard episodes, you simply say we can't talk about it as we don't agree.

Jeez, you can do better than that. We're Trek fans, I expect more.

 

[Prologic9]

^^The problem is no one else will get anything out of it, you're like the crazy guy claiming the sky is falling-- they'd just as soon cut their losses and move along.

 

[Danny99]

Getting us back on topic:

Stewart is not my favorite captain, but I disagree with the comment that he didn't have the command presence as a commander.

I'd really like to say that the writing is what made me dislike Burton, Sirtis, McFadden, and Wheaton, but is it saying something when the last three haven't done much else in their careers, while in addition both Burton and Sirtis seemed to stick with the franchise through the end of ENT in directing and guest starring respectively?

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

Getting us back on topic:

Stewart is not my favorite captain, but I disagree with the comment that he didn't have the command presence as a commander.

I'd really like to say that the writing is what made me dislike Burton, Sirtis, McFadden, and Wheaton, but is it saying something when the last three haven't done much else in their careers, while in addition both Burton and Sirtis seemed to stick with the franchise through the end of ENT in directing and guest starring respectively?

Thank you.

 

[ThePlumsofWrath]

^^The problem is no one else will get anything out of it, you're like the crazy guy claiming the sky is falling-- they'd just as soon cut their losses and move along.

Don't look up.....

 

[ladyheather69]

I understand it is your opinion, PoW, however, as stated in a few posts already, you are in a small, VERY small minority here with that opinion. We are more than willing to debate/ discuss...Trek fans do that quite well.

However, you continue to maintain your position on Sir Patrick Stewart, and from what I have seen, everyone that has posted disagrees with your opinion. If you are trying to persuade people here to agree with your pov, I doubt anyone will change their minds.

And I DO think that the cast has chemistry. If they didn't, the show wouldn't have lasted 7 years. Just having the Trek name on it wouldn't have worked. The actors had to be able to interact with one another in a way that the viewers really believed them and in their reactions, emotions, etc.

 

[ladyheather69]

Getting us back on topic:

Stewart is not my favorite captain, but I disagree with the comment that he didn't have the command presence as a commander.

I'd really like to say that the writing is what made me dislike Burton, Sirtis, McFadden, and Wheaton, but is it saying something when the last three haven't done much else in their careers, while in addition both Burton and Sirtis seemed to stick with the franchise through the end of ENT in directing and guest starring respectively?

Thank you.

So are you saying then that you think the cast was mis cast because several of them haven't gone onto do anything else????? Many actors do shows and get typecast or realize that they have had enough of being in front of the camera.