TOS- Overrated?

[horatio83]

I owe nothing to anybody and only pathetic creatures hide behind a majority opinion. I did not insult you, I merely pointed out what you just acknowledged, that anti-intellectualism obviously play a major role in TNG bashing.
By the way, I like all five Trek series.

 

[BillJ]

I love how TNG bashing always boils down to plain and simple anti-intellectualism. Picard is too preachy and disciplined, Picard does not drink booze, punch the baddy and get the girl, Picard does not reactivate those childhood fantasies ...

The thing is, I never asked that of Picard. I don't hold Picard in a lesser esteem, I own five seasons of TNG on DVD. Picard is a different character created in a different time. But it pisses me off when someone claims that Jim Kirk is somehow a lesser character because he is more active in TOS is simply ludicrous.

 

[horatio83]

[well I guess I'm "ignorant" then, because I think Picard and the Baku are wrong.


but this really isn't the thread for this, sorry to have brought it up.

Ehm, in what way? It is their planet. Should they just bow to the will of the So'na and the Federation?
If the Federation needs allies for the Dominion War it might want to pick decent and reliable folks who don't stab the min the back and if the Federation wants to make medical advances via this radiation on Ba'ku it might want to simply ask the locals instead of forcefully relocating them.

In other words, there is no dilemna, the Federation simply committed a crime.

 

[BillJ]

In other words, there is no dilemna, the Federation simply committed a crime.

I'll throw some chum in the shark tank...

What crime did they commit?

 

[AdmiralScreed]

This is my Kirk but at the moment we talk about your Kirk. You clearly stated that the great thing about Kirk is that he embodies your juvenile hero picture. Not my problem that you haven't grown up yet, not my problem that your anti-intellectualism makes you dislike Picard.

No matter how many insults you toss, the simple fact of the matter is that Kirk is more popular than Picard. That really must hurt someone like you, to know that no matter how hard you try to wish it away, no matter how many times people like you will go on and on about TNG's viewership totals. That your captain and your series are nothing without TOS. That you owe its very existence to us anti-intellectual types whose devotion to TOS is the only thing that made TNG possible...

The argument that the majority is always right doesn't hold much water. The masses may prefer Kirk to Picard, but do the masses really know that much about Star Trek? Practically everything they know about Trek comes from TOS, and that's only because it was the first Trek show and it's been around the longest.

TOS may have spawned TNG, but that doesn't automatically mean that it's better. I watched all seven seasons of TNG before watching a single episode of TOS, and I loved every minute of it. TNG doesn't need to rely on what was established in TOS for it to be good.

EDIT: Removed my line about Kirk fans having bad taste. I was being defensive. My apologies if I offended anyone.

 

[horatio83]

The thing is, I never asked that of Picard. I don't hold Picard in a lesser esteem, I own five seasons of TNG on DVD. Picard is a different character created in a different time. But it pisses me off when someone claims that Jim Kirk is somehow a lesser character because he is more active in TOS is simply ludicrous.

I don't consider Kirk to be a lesser characters than Picard, he is a great Starfleet captain for a good reason. While Spock might analyze a problem to death and McCoy might rant about the moral implications Kirk acts. He relies on his intuition, doesn't mind to rush forward and dares to takes risks without being too reckless. At least in the first season his contemplative sides often shine through which makes him appear partly willingly playful. As Wilde said it, in matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity is the vital thing.
I merely consider Picard to be a better hero, a better rolemodel which might have to do with the rarity of a character like him.

In other words, there is no dilemna, the Federation simply committed a crime.

I'll throw some chum in the shark tank...

What crime did they commit?

They basically tried to steal a planet. I doubt this falls under petty theft.

 

[BillJ]

The majority isn't always right. More people may prefer Kirk to Picard, but all that says is that they have really bad taste.

Why? You still haven't been able to quantify why Picard is better. Only that you like him better, which is clearly just a matter of taste.

TNG doesn't need to rely on what was established in TOS for it to be good.

Try this exercise. Go through and count everything TNG lifted from the TOS universe and then see what you have left...

 

[BillJ]

They basically tried to steal a planet. I doubt this falls under petty theft.

The "we have the planet" line clearly defines what the Federation thinks of the Ba'ku claim to the planet.

 

[horatio83]

TNG doesn't need to rely on what was established in TOS for it to be good.

Try this exercise. Go through and count everything TNG lifted from the TOS universe and then see what you have left...

I guess the truth is somewhere in between. TOS does neither stand on the shoulder of giants nor does it exist in a void. Let's take the Romulans and Klingons, TNG basically created a second version of them just like the new movies seem to create a third version of them.
I think the most apt word would be inspiration, TOS inspired TNG.

The "we have the planet" line clearly defines what the Federation thinks of the Ba'ku claim to the planet.

If I steal your car I can also say "I have your car". Doesn't make it anything else but theft.

 

[xortex]

Picard was a team player - he caved in to suits - unlike JJ Abrams - who's the son of a suit. He doesn't even know he's a suit yet. How cute.

So TNG was a reboot. They certainly booted Kirk out of it just like JJ is booting GR out of it. Spock is the only one who made out. He sold it. Smart.

 

[BillJ]

If I steal your car I can also say "I have your car". Doesn't make it anything else but theft.

Picard is an educated man. Don't you think if he could've made that argument he would've?

 

[horatio83]

And your point is precisely what, that the Feds legitimately took Ba'ku?

 

[BillJ]

And your point is precisely what, that the Feds legitimately took Ba'ku?

Picard definitely seemed to be on the wrong side of Federation law in this one.

 

[indolover]

I acknowledge that TOS set the standard for the later shows, but frankly I think that TNG and DS9 outdid TOS in pretty much every way possible (writing, acting, production values, music, etc.). I can appreciate TOS for its significance and importance in the realm of science fiction. The sad truth, though, is that many shows since TOS have taken it's ideas and done much more and much better things with them. (i.e. TNG). While TOS may have been one of the greatest sci fi shows of all time when it first aired in the 60's, I just don't think it can compare to a lot of the sci fi shows that we've gotten since TNG. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with liking and enjoying it. For people who grew up with TOS, I am sure you are very nostalgic for it, and that's great! Nothing wrong with that. I'm just curious to see if other ST fans feel the same way as I do.

I agree wholly, you've summed up my entire views on TOS.

I respect it for being innovative and groundbreaking for its time, which I guess is a major reason it is such a noted show. But Shatner never acted as well as Stewart did for Picard or Brooks did for Sisko. I've never really liked the original series for that reason (amongst others).

 

[AdmiralScreed]

The majority isn't always right. More people may prefer Kirk to Picard, but all that says is that they have really bad taste.

Why? You still haven't been able to quantify why Picard is better. Only that you like him better, which is clearly just a matter of taste.

TNG doesn't need to rely on what was established in TOS for it to be good.

Try this exercise. Go through and count everything TNG lifted from the TOS universe and then see what you have left...

What do you have left?
-Picard: The intellectual, the diplomat, the man with principles who has the courage to stand up for what he believes in (not that Kirk didn't)
-Data: He constantly develops over the course of the show by learning about what it means to be human. Not to mention that his interactions with the other members of the crew are always fun to watch.
-Worf: The first Klingon in Starfleet. Not one of my personal favorite characters, but he did develop quite a bit. Through Worf we learned a lot about Klingon culture and traditions.
-Q: One of the most delightfully entertaining guest stars to ever be featured on Star Trek. Q episodes were almost always wonderful.
-The Borg: Must I say anymore?
-In general, TNG was a much more intellectually stimulating television show than TOS. The plots were generally more complex, the characters were written better, and a lot of controversial themes were explored (terrorism in The High Ground, gay rights in The Outcast, and mass genocide and the greater good in I, Borg to name a few). I also enjoyed the show's optimistic outlook; greed, racism, poverty and gender roles no longer existed on Earth. No longer was the goal of the individual to gain profit, but rather to better him/herself, whether that be by joining Starfleet or pursuing some other kind of career (The Neutral Zone).
I could go on...

Also, look at my last post because I have edited it.

 

[horatio83]

And Dougherty was on the right side just because he had an extra pin? The Federation is not an empire that annexes planets whenever it wishes to.

 

[xortex]

He didn't have all the facts and didn't know the Sonia were in league with the Federation bullying and strongarming their own people. If there was a tenous treaty it was probably bogus. The Federation was using criminals to steal what they wanted.

 

[horatio83]

And your point is precisely what, that the Feds legitimately took Ba'ku?

Picard definitely seemed to be on the wrong side of Federation law in this one.

The Federation is not an empire that annexes planets whenever it wishes to. TOS features plenty of fine Prime Directive stories that made this point clearly enough.
Perhaps you experience a spontaneous confusion between Wars and Trek?

 

[indolover]

Kirk, so far, is more timeless. When I walk through the WalMart card aisle, there are talking greeting cards of Kirk and Spock. No Picard. The pop culture gift catalogs this time of year have a page or two of classic Trek crap to buy. My daughter even bought me a metal lunchbox of the TOS gang. TNG is not there, unless Picard face is on one t-shirt along with all other captains. Other than that, it's TOS.

It's too soon too call Kirk more timeless, but the results so far after 17 years of TNG being off the air seem to favor him.

How does this make Kirk a better captain? What does better captain even mean? It's a subjective term IMO. I don't even agree he is better known by the man on the street, since in numerous countries TNG is re-run often, hence leading to high levels of exposure.

 

[BillJ]

What do you have left?

-Worf: The first Klingon in Starfleet. Not one of my personal favorite characters, but he did develop quite a bit. Through Worf we learned a lot about Klingon culture and traditions.
-Q: One of the most delightfully entertaining guest stars to ever be featured on Star Trek. Q episodes were almost always wonderful.

Remember there are no Klingons or Starfleet, those are TOS inventions and Q is borderline because he is simply a redressed Trelane...

Whether TOS or TNG is more intellectually stimulating is a matter of personal opinion yet you continue to state it as a fact.