The Blu-Ray versions are nice, but you can't dress up the clunky story lines, the sedate pace, and the soporific lighting. Also - conference room exposition.
Has TNG Aged Well?
- Thread starter KirbyHawk
- Start date
This is something all the spinoffs suffer from. Ninety-five percent of the episodes are just boring.
So boring. I fall asleep to a TNG episode about twice a week. Even the "exciting" ones don't grip my attention.
I guess I am old and jaded or something.
If I count up my list of all time favorite episodes of all the Star Trek series, TNG will be WAY over half the list. They had some of the best Trek ever, and arguably some of the worst as well. LOL
No, generally speaking I don't think TNG has aged that well, especially the first two or three seasons. The ones after that still work much better. But there's always that late eighties feel to the show. The blu-ray remaster obviously helps (and I so wish they do that for DS9 too) but the stories and aesthetics are what they are. In my mind DS9 holds up much, much better, and even VOY. The TNG period is just so darn bland, with bland characters (Data and Worf the exceptions, but then again, they're not your Roddenberry-esque perfect 24th century humans).
Do you think that's a tendency of most '90s series? If so which TV series of that time were able to avoid it?
It definitely looks a lot lot better and more watchable on Blu-Ray (sharper, crisper, more vibrant). And though it's my least favourite of the series, I'd even give the first two seasons a pass as they're pretty ropey for DS9, VOY and ENT too. The problem I've always had with it is probably one of tone and pacing: many episodes feel very sedate, sermonizing, and Stewart comes over as very patrician and stick-up-his-arse. But it does have with one of my top ten all-time favourite Trek episodes in Cause And Effect, which I can watch endlessly 
I think we all have forgotten how lecturey the 90's were. TNG definitely reflects a decade where it was ok for (mostly white) people to lecture everyone on everything.
I think a real big issue with TNG (and a lot of the spin-offs, and old TV in general) is that episodic television just feels really sort of clunky and awkward now. In this new golden age of television storytelling it's hard to sit through 175+ episodes where there's not a whole lot of continuity between them. I like episodic TV in the background well enough, but focusing on TNG for a long period of time is almost impossible for me.
Good luck with that. Trolls ignore what they can't answer.
I don't know about TNG but you're doing a great job of lecturing.
I think the good stories still hold up. But that whole happy family bullshit is just that. It holds up even less after I've spent five years in the Navy (the whole five years having been spent on a sea rotation), where I've have to go as long as three months away from homeport. Nerves fry pretty early on. And I was one of the lucky ones that never spent more than two months straight with no port visit.
Combine that with deep space exploration, and yeah.....no.
Last edited:
Funny.. I was just thinking about this the other day... For me, many of the stories do hold up pretty well. Once the 3rd Season kicked into gear, the writing got better and the sets were more complex. The LOOK of the show, especially early on does not hold up well.. The sets were over-lighted and the hair and make up were decidedly signs of the time. Back in the 60s/early 70s, and not just with Trek but with other shows and movies (2001 for example), they went out their way to make sure you knew it was "the future" with hair styles and costumes. While some of the costumes on TNG were very unique, the looks of the characters was very "hair-metal band-esque" and now when I watch, I find it very distracting.
As the seasons wore on, this improved, as did the set design and lighting. It became a bit more mood-appropriate and subtle.
As the seasons wore on, this improved, as did the set design and lighting. It became a bit more mood-appropriate and subtle.
I'm the exact opposite. I think from season three on, the show took on an over lit, bland look.
I agree with BillJ about the lighting. The show was actually lit very darkly, dramatically, in it's first two seasons. I think they got a new lighting director in season three and he ramped up all the lights, which is how it stayed for the rest of the seven years. (Ironically for all the people who say how much better the lighting is in Star Trek: Generations, few of them acknowledge that the show used similar lighting on a frequent basis in seasons one and two.)
On the topic of hairstyles etc though, I would have to agree that the show has aged.
Not necessarily with the male main characters, but definitely the guest cast often had screamingly 80s hair, and Troi and Crusher had their moments too. But I guess that is simply being a product of it's time. Even though they generally managed to avoid it in TOS, there are definitely times when the hairstyles there failed to looks suitably.... 'futuristic'. 
Last edited:
There was a touchy feely vibe emanating from TNG. Having a counselor as one of the prominent characters on the show contributed to that vibe.
Compare Troi's role on TNG with that of TOS's McCoy, and you can see a big difference. Besides being a doctor, McCoy was essentially Kirk's counselor. McCoy was the blunt talking friend and adviser, who many times got into heated arguments with Kirk. McCoy was nothing like the soft spoken touchy feely Troi. There were many incidents of blunt talk among the characters of TOS.
I don't recall many incidents of heated arguments among the TNG crew, or between Picard and his subordinate advisers. There were no "damn it, Jean Luc" moments, spoken by Riker or Troi.
I guess it was a sign of the times. I agree that DS9 came off better than TNG. DS9 was edgier. I think that quality stands the test of time better.
Doctor Crusher has her moments in season one, storming into the Ready Room to berate Picard for some decision or another because she "cares", but it's one of those things that got watered down in later years.
No. 20th/21st century viewers just deal better with imperfections because we are imperfect.
STNG characters are imperfect, but less so than us..I think the greatest difference is that we don't see them bow to some of our baser impulses. However, though argument is not not necessarily and indicator of quality, there were quite a few confrontations in STNG you've probably forgotten. Most had to do with what was proper in relation to Starfleet conduct, ie: the Doctor going out on a limb for a Ferengi scientist, Picard admonishing Worf for any series of incidents, including his duty to Starfleet whne faced with cultural quandries, and Picard with Riker in Pegasus. Riker also disagreed with Picard on more than a few occasions.
As I've pointed out, while the ST shows are generally positive, STNG argued completely from positiivity in a pseudo-utopia to make it's points, as opposed to the negative, often dystopic futures we see. I find it unique and refreshing.
The show is exactly the same as it was but I've changed so some episodes I used to love like Redemption don't interest me much anymore but I really like stuff like The Survivors or Q-Who. I don't think any of the Trek TV shows are perfect though, but they all have something to offer.
Similar threads
