Aquiel is shitty.
Revisiting ST-TNG...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Aquiel is shitty.
It has to be said that watching a series on a daily basis or even squeezing in a couple of episodes at a time isn't the same as watching it on a weekly basis as well as sometimes having to wait weeks for new episodes. When a series is first aired you're getting things piecemeal and in digestible morsels with downtime for anticipation to build for the next installment. Watching episodes daily or in quick succession I think you notice changes and patterns more quickly. It's also easier to get into a sort of rhythm with a series.
For me it says a lot when I can get caught up in a series daily and not get tired of it. I watched JAG on a daily basis as opposed to seeing it in its initial run and found myself getting caught up in the show over pretty much all of it except for parts of its final season. Revisiting Babylon 5 and The X-Files was a great deal of fun except for some of B5's final season and much of X-Files last two seasons. Watching The Outer Limits daily was wonderful except for a good portion of the second season. Revisiting Futurama was a lot of fun. Revisiting Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea was very hit-and-miss.
For TNG I'm seeing that (at this point) the series stumbled to get going in Season 1, gets into more of a groove in Season 2 and then peaks in Seasons 3 and 4. But after that the series falters and sputters through Season 5 and into 6. Overall the feeling is of a series trying to be other things than what it was in Seasons 2 through 4. It feels complacent, generally uninspired and just plain out of creative energy.
I'm hanging in, but it has become a chore with little joy to it.
For me it says a lot when I can get caught up in a series daily and not get tired of it. I watched JAG on a daily basis as opposed to seeing it in its initial run and found myself getting caught up in the show over pretty much all of it except for parts of its final season. Revisiting Babylon 5 and The X-Files was a great deal of fun except for some of B5's final season and much of X-Files last two seasons. Watching The Outer Limits daily was wonderful except for a good portion of the second season. Revisiting Futurama was a lot of fun. Revisiting Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea was very hit-and-miss.
For TNG I'm seeing that (at this point) the series stumbled to get going in Season 1, gets into more of a groove in Season 2 and then peaks in Seasons 3 and 4. But after that the series falters and sputters through Season 5 and into 6. Overall the feeling is of a series trying to be other things than what it was in Seasons 2 through 4. It feels complacent, generally uninspired and just plain out of creative energy.
I'm hanging in, but it has become a chore with little joy to it.
Last edited:
To each their own--I loved TNG a lot back when it was first on and time has done little to change that opinion--in fact having about 15 years worth of television under my belt since then I still think it holds up extremely well and is a great consistent series.
I actually like "Aquiel." It's not great or anything, but it at least feels more like a Trek plot than the overrated "Ship in a Bottle" or "Chain of Command." It's a serviceable mystery plot with a cool twist ending. All IMO, of course.
You've got the right word, there - consistent. The thing about TNG is that, even as the episodes rise and fall in quality, there is always, consistently, an extremely competent level of production that includes acting, writing, directing, and pacing. That consistency makes the series extremely watchable, even if an individual episode's plot is sub-par. That's something that isn't being made clear in Warped9's reviews, obviously because he does not share that opinion, and that's why his reviews have been skewed lower than, I think, the episodes actually deserve.
Warped9 seems to be, at times, criticizing the comfort level that TNG had reached by 5th season, as if it's a criticism. But Star Trek has always been successful based almost entirely on the level of comfort it instills in the viewer. This is not intellectually challenging hard sci-fi we're talking about here, or risky heavy-hitting drama. TOS, even at its best, was great precisely because it was so easy to watch, so comfortable, so likeable - not because it taxed the brain, or the emotions. By literary sf standards, City on the Edge of Forever, Space Seed, and Trouble With Tribbles are lightweight throwaway sci-fi plots, done, and done much better, in dozens of stories published previously since the 30's. By comparison, both TOS and TNG are, for the most part, extremely simplistic.
What they do have going for them, though, and what makes them among the 2 best sf shows ever produced, is their likability, their approachability, and their comfort. And that comes from creating great characters, casting great actors to play them, and giving them entertaining things to say. That takes good writing, of course, but only good writing of a certain kind. I love Ron Moore, but he's not Isaac Asimov or Greg Bear. These shows are fantastic, yes, but they're fantastic because they're easy, predictable, formulaic fun. They're charming as hell. They're exciting for all the obvious reasons. They make us want to live in that universe. (And for all the press on how dark DS9 was, that show ultimately succeeded too for the same reason - DS9 was a place we all kinda wanted to visit, and have a drink at Quark's, maybe play a dart game with Miles and Bashir...)
So, to complain that TNG had become formulaic and comfortable is to complain that it is Star Trek. It is nostalgia and nostalgia alone that makes anyone think that TOS, or in fact most of the franchise, had anything going for it more than that, it's intense likability. Now don't get me wrong - likability is not an easy characteristic to evoke. Very few shows have done it as successfully as TOS, TNG, and DS9, which is why they're all great television.
And also, don't mistake me for an apologist for bad writing. The 5th season of TNG is clearly a weak one, and the first third of season 6, up until Chain of Command, is more experimental, but hollow and silly. The first 2 season of TOS are clearly better, on the whole, than its third. There are levels of quality here, to be sure.
But my point is, TNG's consistency made most of its episodes at least very likable and watchable, Star Trek's primary asset. A mediocre TNG episode, for example, is far more watchable than, say, a mediocre X-Files episode, or a mediocre Voyager episode. Even the bad TNG episodes, much like the bad TOS episodes (and they can be very, very bad) are still better television than bad episodes of most other sf shows produced before or since. That's why these string of 1-star reviews for TNG episodes is just silly. Transformers 2 and Lady in the Water are 1-star. Let's keep some perspective here. A failed TNG episode is still usually at least 2 or 3 (on a 5-star scale, of course), because of, as I said, that one asset the show had in spades: likability.
Last edited:
This is what is called "bland". This is a show that quit taking chances as Paramount had one eye looking towards the big screen.
I'm a huge The Next Generation fan... but by the time we get to seasons five, six and seven there is a general lack of interesting ideas being presented.
But let's face it. In the long history of television, it is very rare for a series to maintain high quality beyond a few seasons. There is almost inevitably a dip.
All five Trek TV series have had horrible clunker episodes. There are some episodes of TOS and TNG that I wouldn't want to inflict on my worst enemy.
But many episodes are exceptionally brilliant and inspiring. That's how I judge a TV series -- by how good its best episodes are.
TNG started very slow, soared to great heights for a while, then sunk a bit at the end. All part of the natural aging process for a TV series.
TNG wasn't formulaic--you want formulaic watch CSI. TNG was episodic but that doesn't mean formulaic. TNG told a wide variety of story types from policitial intrigue, high concept mysteries, character dramas, to allegories. And within a given subset such as the mystery the show wasn't predictable. Rarely did I figure out the mystery before the characters did.
TNG wasn't designed to be a epic serialized drama and that's perfectly fine. I appreciate its more intimate focus. As much as I enjoyed LOST I wouldn't want an overly complex plot-driven fast paced unwieldy serialized drama as my only entertainment avenue.
Yes by S6 and for sure by S7 the show had started running on fumes but think about it--TNG managed to produce over 3 seasons of solid, consistent relatively awful free episodes and was in its 6th season before it started wobbling. Compare that to shows these days that can barely sustain one decent season let alone multiple seasons of consistent entertainment. Shows these days have uneven seasons and within them episodes which are uneven themselves, uninteresting characters. Or they burn bright early then burn out fast i.e. Heroes post S1, BSG in its last few seasons and BSG was a 4 season series not 7 like TNG. And TNG was pretty fresh in its stories and not the heavily recycled shows that ENT or Fringe are these days.
And even with the weaker episodes of TNG the characters are always fun to see.
TNG wasn't designed to be a epic serialized drama and that's perfectly fine. I appreciate its more intimate focus. As much as I enjoyed LOST I wouldn't want an overly complex plot-driven fast paced unwieldy serialized drama as my only entertainment avenue.
Yes by S6 and for sure by S7 the show had started running on fumes but think about it--TNG managed to produce over 3 seasons of solid, consistent relatively awful free episodes and was in its 6th season before it started wobbling. Compare that to shows these days that can barely sustain one decent season let alone multiple seasons of consistent entertainment. Shows these days have uneven seasons and within them episodes which are uneven themselves, uninteresting characters. Or they burn bright early then burn out fast i.e. Heroes post S1, BSG in its last few seasons and BSG was a 4 season series not 7 like TNG. And TNG was pretty fresh in its stories and not the heavily recycled shows that ENT or Fringe are these days.
And even with the weaker episodes of TNG the characters are always fun to see.
I'm not talking about a dip in quality, I'm talking about a concerted effort to 'play it safe' as to not mess up their chance at being successful on the big screen.
Sorry, but TNG was VERY formulaic:
1) Problem:
------------
I) If Societal/Cultural - Fed character (usualluy Picard) gives long winded speech on how mankind (or Federation) rightly/correctly dealt with situation.
II) If external (Anomoly/Alien of the Week) - Crew tries valiantly to deal with situation.
2) Ultimate Solution
-------------------
I) If Societal/Cultural - Fed character (usualluy Picard) is ultimately proven right in that how mankind (or Federation) dealt with issue IS the 'right way'; and some for of the pontificated solution worked to resolve the issue in the end - or Fed characters got culture to more toward said solution.
II) If external (Anomoly/Alien of the Week) - Crew finds technobable particle and modifies piece of equipment to project particle to resolve issue (Sometimes with added for effect 'possible danger to ship/crew, that in the end, never materializes); and said particle saves the day/corrects situation.
^^^^
This can be used to describe teh majority of TNG Season 5, 6, and 7 plotlines.
You're probably right. To me, 'playing it safe' means less interesting and therefore lower quality. Maybe to someone else, safe-playing can still be great stuff.
And your hunch is supported by the fact that DS9, which had no big-screen plans, had seasons 6 and 7 which were actually quite good. And DS9 most definitely did NOT play it safe! Quite the contrary, actually.
You are deliberately simplifying things--you clearly aren't inclined to like TNG. I'm talking about the episodes having varying dynamics in how they unfold and the solutions to the crisis weren't cookie cutter. Compare that to CSI, Law and Order etc.
Sorry, but TNG was VERY formulaic:
1) Problem:
------------
I) If Societal/Cultural - Fed character (usualluy Picard) gives long winded speech on how mankind (or Federation) rightly/correctly dealt with situation.
II) If external (Anomoly/Alien of the Week) - Crew tries valiantly to deal with situation.
2) Ultimate Solution
-------------------
I) If Societal/Cultural - Fed character (usualluy Picard) is ultimately proven right in that how mankind (or Federation) dealt with issue IS the 'right way'; and some for of the pontificated solution worked to resolve the issue in the end - or Fed characters got culture to more toward said solution.
II) If external (Anomoly/Alien of the Week) - Crew finds technobable particle and modifies piece of equipment to project particle to resolve issue (Sometimes with added for effect 'possible danger to ship/crew, that in the end, never materializes); and said particle saves the day/corrects situation.
^^^^
This can be used to describe teh majority of TNG Season 5, 6, and 7 plotlines.
Which still didn't work out, since the ensemble cast didn't translate well to the big screen, and "All Good Things" simply rose the quality bar too high to match.
And most of the better stories suited for the big screen had already been told ("Yesterday's Enterprise", "Best of Both Worlds", etc).
With TOS, it was different. The movies then were about relaunching a canceled series that had been vindicated, the TNG movies were just about money-making.
The cast's performance and the production standards may be consistent, but the overall result can still be bland and uninspired.
"Face Of The Enemy" ****
Troi finds herself impersonating a Romulan intelligence officer aboard a Romulan warbird.
As implausible as the setup for this story was I actually found myself interested in it. I don't think it was awesome, but it was intriguing. They seemed to be trying to give us some insight into Romulan culture as they had done with the Klingons way back in Season 2 with "A Matter Of Honor." Here the Romulan Commander is played in somewhat similar vein as the original Romulan Commander in TOS' "Balance Of Terror" in that she's not played as a caricature. If anything I think it could have been served better with a little more running time to flesh out the story a little more.
Two big
I saw in it was a) how could some dissidents know where to find Troi and how to abduct her without some sort of solid intelligence which would argue for an extensive spy network, and b) how could they possibly expect a ship's Counselor to know the access codes of Starfleet defense systems?
Note that I don't recall having fond memories of this episode so it's I surprise that I liked it better than I remember. That said part of it may be due to the fact that it seems so much better than a lot of what I've seen so far this season.
"Face Of The Enemy" ****
Troi finds herself impersonating a Romulan intelligence officer aboard a Romulan warbird.
As implausible as the setup for this story was I actually found myself interested in it. I don't think it was awesome, but it was intriguing. They seemed to be trying to give us some insight into Romulan culture as they had done with the Klingons way back in Season 2 with "A Matter Of Honor." Here the Romulan Commander is played in somewhat similar vein as the original Romulan Commander in TOS' "Balance Of Terror" in that she's not played as a caricature. If anything I think it could have been served better with a little more running time to flesh out the story a little more.
Two big
I saw in it was a) how could some dissidents know where to find Troi and how to abduct her without some sort of solid intelligence which would argue for an extensive spy network, and b) how could they possibly expect a ship's Counselor to know the access codes of Starfleet defense systems?Note that I don't recall having fond memories of this episode so it's I surprise that I liked it better than I remember. That said part of it may be due to the fact that it seems so much better than a lot of what I've seen so far this season.
Last edited:
Um...yes....Paramount certainly didnt want to make STTMP, STII, III for making money. Nope. They just wanted to make fans happy....yesirree
RAMA
The cast's performance and the production standards may be consistent, but the overall result can still be bland and uninspired.
"Face Of The Enemy" ****
Troi finds herself impersonating a Romulan intelligence officer aboard a Romulan warbird.
As implausible as the setup for this story was I actually found myself interested in it. I don't think it was awesome, but it was intriguing. They seemed to be trying to give us some insight into Romulan culture as they had done with the Klingons way back in Season 2 with "A Matter Of Honor." Here the Romulan Commander is played in somewhat similar vein as the original Romulan Commander in TOS' "Balance Of Terror" in that she's not played as a caricature. If anything I think it could have been served better with a little more running time to flesh out the story a little more.
Two big
Note that I don't recall having fond memories of this episode so it's I surprise that I liked it better than I remember. That said part of it may be due to the fact that it seems so much better than a lot of what I've seen so far this season.
I tend to disagree here, although season 7 wasnt as good as recent earlier seasons, there is no real pattern of fading creativity. In terms of "blandness" i think its the other way around, the characters became more interesting as time went on, and that often added to the stories, because there was a concerted effort to tie them into the events of the story, with fewer "b" stories being told as the show went on.
RAMA
Earlier upthread I made mention of a perceived lack of energy in the show from Season 5 onward. The truth is it is a matter of perception and tastes. I'm finding that these past two seasons have been generally flat because it often seems plodding and uninspired, and much of it may be simply how the story is being put across. If these stories had been done earlier in Seasons 2 through 4 then perhaps they might have had more jump to them. Presently at this point so much in the episode feels like they're desperate not to have things too energetic and thus be seen as more "serious minded" television. I don't know how else to say it but that for me it's often coming across as bland and plodding.
The episodes I'm rating as 4's are really just getting nudged up into that because they stand out in an otherwise dull stretch of episodes, but I don't think they're as good as the four rated episodes from the earlier seasons.
What I see happening isn't so much what is being put onscreen, but how it's being put onscreen. I guess I really don't care for this overly subdued approach to Trek.
The episodes I'm rating as 4's are really just getting nudged up into that because they stand out in an otherwise dull stretch of episodes, but I don't think they're as good as the four rated episodes from the earlier seasons.
What I see happening isn't so much what is being put onscreen, but how it's being put onscreen. I guess I really don't care for this overly subdued approach to Trek.
Sorry, but TNG was VERY formulaic:
1) Problem:
------------
I) If Societal/Cultural - Fed character (usualluy Picard) gives long winded speech on how mankind (or Federation) rightly/correctly dealt with situation.
II) If external (Anomoly/Alien of the Week) - Crew tries valiantly to deal with situation.
2) Ultimate Solution
-------------------
I) If Societal/Cultural - Fed character (usualluy Picard) is ultimately proven right in that how mankind (or Federation) dealt with issue IS the 'right way'; and some for of the pontificated solution worked to resolve the issue in the end - or Fed characters got culture to more toward said solution.
II) If external (Anomoly/Alien of the Week) - Crew finds technobable particle and modifies piece of equipment to project particle to resolve issue (Sometimes with added for effect 'possible danger to ship/crew, that in the end, never materializes); and said particle saves the day/corrects situation.
^^^^
This can be used to describe teh majority of TNG Season 5, 6, and 7 plotlines.
Actually this is reversed, STNG had far fewer cultural judgements and straw cultures than TOS did. Later seasons focused on deepening established lore ( ie: Klingon/Rom politics, "family" matters, origins of characters, interests of characters (archeaology, etc) and more "high concept" type episodes.
RAMA
I agree with you partially here...there was possibly only a two season period where STNG tackled deeper issues consistently...with other seasons sprinkling them in between. I would definitely have liked to have seen more of it, but within the ST format its hard to get past creating cultures to judge and then break down for their "wrongness". It eventually comes off as smug and self righteous". Maybe some more "open ended" stories could have solved that issue.
Yeah, yeah, that really didn't come out right.
What I meant was that (yes) it was for the money but the TOS movies also revived what was a dead franchise at the same time and expanded the universe a bit too, made the character more 3-dimensional, etc. At the same time making money of course.
The TNG movies though, well there really was no need for them but I can see why they did them. Would have been nicer if they'd bother putting real money into them instead of making them on the cheap though.
Similar threads
