Murder of TNG?

[Tom]

The show was not 'canceled'! The Berman and the other producers felt it was the best time for the show to end. They knew they had movies to follow that would keep TNG alive. Actually, only TOS and Enterprise were 'cancelled'. TNG, DS9, and VOY ended when the producers wanted them to end for whatever there reasons, but mostly because they felt more than 7 seasons is a bit to much to keep a creative edge.

 

[Tom]

TNG was cancelled?

No it was not, but Nowhere Man was canceled by UPN back in 1996 LOL

 

[The Dominion]

It wasn't so much canceled as it was ended a year earlier than was originally planned. The decision was of course made for money by the studio, but it was probably for the better because it let the show go out while it was ahead. I assume that the reason the other series had seven seasons as well, was something the producers decided because of TNG.

 

[Shatnertage]

I thought Stewart was perfect as Professor X. I just didn't like the way he was so easily taken out or neutralized by the bad guys.

Sure, I thought he made a good Professor X too, but I maintain that the idea that ANYTHING is as good as Star Trek (with the possible exception of Babylon 5) is laughable.

I can't help it. I'm just that partial to the Star Trek franchise.

Him in Hamlet opposite David Tennant wasn't shabby.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Gah can you imagine if they were still making TNG after all these years? Coronation street in Space.

I know you were joking but it's kind of a neat idea if you think about it.

A continuously running Trek series set on the same ship but with the crew rotating in and out like a real military vessel might have been interesting.

We have a sci fi show just like that. It's called Dr. Who.

And yeah, could be excellent and who knows maybe JJ will start a series and that's exactly what we will get!

 

[Trekker4747]

I would sort-of argue by TNG's seventh season the "writing was on the wall" -and already had been in the sixth season in fact- and everyone knew TNG would end and move to films. Because of this most of TNG's stronger writers either moved to DS9 or simply moved on completely leaving TNG with, well, a rather limited writing staff which is why the writing is so lame in TNG's final season. Brannon Braga who is pretty good and coming up with stories is best when someone who is a better writer is over him. A couple of TNG's better episodes in S3 (like Yesterday's Enterprise) is partly his work but it gets filtered through the better writers (like Piller) and it becomes a fine episode.

Braga on his own? We get crap like "Genesis" which makes no sense, throws any attempt TNG made at making some-kind-of logical sense when it came to its premise and "science" out the window and is just an episodic shock fest with everyone all happy at the end as if nothing horrific had just happened like someone's face being burned off by acidic venom and needing to be reconstructed or the consequences of civilians and children being on the ship. Not to mention that the "virus" was fairly easily caused by a simple mistake by Crusher.

Ugh.

Jeri Taylor is another writer who's work mostly came through more in the seventh season (and through Voyager) and she is someone whose writing I'm not a fan of, her stories can tend to be very "women centric" and not that that is a bad thing but they can greatly feel that way so we get episodes that feel like grocery store romance novels (Sub Rosa.)

Anyway, with the stronger writers on TNG either moved to DS9, working on the movie or moving on completely that left TNG with not much to go with. Had they felt the need to continue to do TNG the better writers may not have moved on and TNG wouldn't have had such a lack luster seventh season.

At the same time Berman was also taking a much more safer, blander, "Trek as a product" approach to TNG which also really softened the series during its last couple of years. (Him being against story arcs being a big part of this.)

TNG's final season wouldn't have been such a mess if it wasn't decided it was going to be the last one (but the decision did need to be made in order to give it a proper ending) and if Berman wasn't such a corporate asshole who wanted to play it safe in order to line his ass with money.

 

[Silvercrest]

For some reason, networks seems to ST. They tried to kill TOS, it barely got made and was soon canceled, and then TNG is cancelled.

Minor point, Paramount had nothing to do with TOS.

Fixed, thanks!

Another minor point: Networks had nothing to do with the first-run syndicated TNG.

So, who's the villain of this conspiracy theory? (Little joke there, for those who know.)

 

[Nowhere Man]

The show was not 'canceled'! The Berman and the other producers felt it was the best time for the show to end. They knew they had movies to follow that would keep TNG alive. Actually, only TOS and Enterprise were 'cancelled'. TNG, DS9, and VOY ended when the producers wanted them to end for whatever there reasons, but mostly because they felt more than 7 seasons is a bit to much to keep a creative edge.

I know the show wasen't cancelled, ideas being a smart ass. I personally witnessed the whole run of the show in its original run. The OP said it was cancelled.

 

[Trek Survivor]

I would sort-of argue by TNG's seventh season the "writing was on the wall" -and already had been in the sixth season in fact- and everyone knew TNG would end and move to films. Because of this most of TNG's stronger writers either moved to DS9 or simply moved on completely leaving TNG with, well, a rather limited writing staff which is why the writing is so lame in TNG's final season. Brannon Braga who is pretty good and coming up with stories is best when someone who is a better writer is over him. A couple of TNG's better episodes in S3 (like Yesterday's Enterprise) is partly his work but it gets filtered through the better writers (like Piller) and it becomes a fine episode.

Braga on his own? We get crap like "Genesis" which makes no sense, throws any attempt TNG made at making some-kind-of logical sense when it came to its premise and "science" out the window and is just an episodic shock fest with everyone all happy at the end as if nothing horrific had just happened like someone's face being burned off by acidic venom and needing to be reconstructed or the consequences of civilians and children being on the ship. Not to mention that the "virus" was fairly easily caused by a simple mistake by Crusher.

Ugh.

Jeri Taylor is another writer who's work mostly came through more in the seventh season (and through Voyager) and she is someone whose writing I'm not a fan of, her stories can tend to be very "women centric" and not that that is a bad thing but they can greatly feel that way so we get episodes that feel like grocery store romance novels (Sub Rosa.)

Anyway, with the stronger writers on TNG either moved to DS9, working on the movie or moving on completely that left TNG with not much to go with. Had they felt the need to continue to do TNG the better writers may not have moved on and TNG wouldn't have had such a lack luster seventh season.

At the same time Berman was also taking a much more safer, blander, "Trek as a product" approach to TNG which also really softened the series during its last couple of years. (Him being against story arcs being a big part of this.)

TNG's final season wouldn't have been such a mess if it wasn't decided it was going to be the last one (but the decision did need to be made in order to give it a proper ending) and if Berman wasn't such a corporate asshole who wanted to play it safe in order to line his ass with money.

Um - writers didn't move over to DS9 from TNG until AFTER the seventh season (e.g. Ron Moore and Rene Echevarria).

And yet again we get a "blame everything on Berman" post. "Corporate asshole" "line his ass with money"???

There's no point even debating your clearly well-researched and thoughtful opinion...

Berman did so much good for TNG AND DS9, but fans seem to forget this...
As for very few story arcs on TNG, I actually saw this as a good thing.

 

[nnnnnnn]

I thought Stewart was perfect as Professor X. I just didn't like the way he was so easily taken out or neutralized by the bad guys.

If you think Professor X is anywhere near as interesting or deep as Picard, then you seriously misunderstand Picard. With age and re-watching the best episodes, you'll learn eventually to understand why Picard has a nuance and humanity that Professor X just doesn't have.

 

[Lindley]

Can anybody even think of any sci-fi shows that surpassed that mark, besides X-Files' 9 seasons (Which all but lost one of its mere two principle characters toward the end) and Stargate's 10 seasons (Which had to find a new network during its time)?

Well, there's Doctor Who with its 32 seasons.

Even if you only count the 2005 revival, it's completed 6 years already and showing no signs of slowing down.

Part of the reason for this longevity is that increasing cast salaries aren't a problem, since a rotating cast is part of the premise.

 

[sojourner]

I thought Stewart was perfect as Professor X. I just didn't like the way he was so easily taken out or neutralized by the bad guys.

If you think Professor X is anywhere near as interesting or deep as Picard, then you seriously misunderstand Picard. With age and re-watching the best episodes, you'll learn eventually to understand why Picard has a nuance and humanity that Professor X just doesn't have.

Side stepping the issue?

 

[Sindatur]

Can anybody even think of any sci-fi shows that surpassed that mark, besides X-Files' 9 seasons (Which all but lost one of its mere two principle characters toward the end) and Stargate's 10 seasons (Which had to find a new network during its time)?

Well, there's Doctor Who with its 32 seasons.

Even if you only count the 2005 revival, it's completed 6 years already and showing no signs of slowing down.

Part of the reason for this longevity is that increasing cast salaries aren't a problem, since a rotating cast is part of the premise.

I think that was meant to be part of the point being made. Doctor Who is able to stay fresh and not become exhorbitantly priced actor-wise, precisely because of the rotating cast. Most of The American shows with longevity over 5 years, also had many cast changes or re-inventings of the storylines in an attempt (wether one agrees they succeeded or not) to keep things fresh, and to help keep Actor expense down.

 

[sonak]

I thought Stewart was perfect as Professor X. I just didn't like the way he was so easily taken out or neutralized by the bad guys.

If you think Professor X is anywhere near as interesting or deep as Picard, then you seriously misunderstand Picard. With age and re-watching the best episodes, you'll learn eventually to understand why Picard has a nuance and humanity that Professor X just doesn't have.

Professor X is an awesome character, whether played by Stewart or not. I love the combination of idealism and Machiavellianism that he shows.

 

[LOKAI of CHERON]

I can go either way on The First Duty, but The Inner Light is the cure for insomnia.

This was the point I made on "The Royale" thread, in that fans often disagree on the worth of particular episodes with no detriment to the fans. I thought "The Royale" was a terrible episode, but there are those who liked it. I thought "The Inner Light" was a classic, you don't.

It is just the way of things.

I love The Royale!

+1

 

[SeerSGB]

Can anybody even think of any sci-fi shows that surpassed that mark, besides X-Files' 9 seasons (Which all but lost one of its mere two principle characters toward the end) and Stargate's 10 seasons (Which had to find a new network during its time)?

Well, there's Doctor Who with its 32 seasons.

Even if you only count the 2005 revival, it's completed 6 years already and showing no signs of slowing down.

Part of the reason for this longevity is that increasing cast salaries aren't a problem, since a rotating cast is part of the premise.

I think that was meant to be part of the point being made. Doctor Who is able to stay fresh and not become exhorbitantly priced actor-wise, precisely because of the rotating cast. Most of The American shows with longevity over 5 years, also had many cast changes or re-inventings of the storylines in an attempt (wether one agrees they succeeded or not) to keep things fresh, and to help keep Actor expense down.

I think TNG could have rotated casts. Maybe not to the point of being around now, but for a few seasons. It just had to be handled as being a good thing, the characters move onward and upward and leaving the door open for them to pop in from time to time, but starting out from a position of positiveness for the new characters.

Of all the post-TOS Trek series I think TNG had the best shot at that cause it didn't have a fixed story arc like DS9 and Voyager. It was an open-end drama with no real "end" to their story.

 

[Tina Lawton]

I thought Stewart was perfect as Professor X. I just didn't like the way he was so easily taken out or neutralized by the bad guys.

If you think Professor X is anywhere near as interesting or deep as Picard, then you seriously misunderstand Picard. With age and re-watching the best episodes, you'll learn eventually to understand why Picard has a nuance and humanity that Professor X just doesn't have.

Oh, please.

I didn't say "Picard" was the perfect Professor X, I said that "Stewart" was the perfect Professor X.

Picard was a character in a television series. Stewart is an actor. As characters the two were different, but as an actor Stewart played the roles of both effectively.

Geez...

 

[MacLeod]

TNG had run it's course by the end of the 7th year it was no where near the heights of S3-5. In contrast DSN which to be clear is ST (the OP might not like it, but that doesn't mean it's not ST) managed to maintaina higher standard of episodes in it's last year. That isn't to say it didn't have weaker episodes in that year, it's just that comparing S7 of both shows I would have to give DSN the award for being most consistant in terms of quality.

^and I agree Stewart played the role of Professor X well, with the material he had to work with.

 

[SeerSGB]

TNG had run it's course by the end of the 7th year it was no where near the heights of S3-5. In contrast DSN which to be clear is ST (the OP might not like it, but that doesn't mean it's not ST) managed to maintaina higher standard of episodes in it's last year. That isn't to say it didn't have weaker episodes in that year, it's just that comparing S7 of both shows I would have to give DSN the award for being most consistant in terms of quality.

^and I agree Stewart played the role of Professor X well, with the material he had to work with.

What helped DS9 was them switching over to story-arcs. Look at the first couple of seasons, where it was more or less TNG on a space-station, once they had a defined goal and story that was all DS9's alone the show got better.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

If you think Professor X is anywhere near as interesting or deep as Picard, then you seriously misunderstand Picard. With age and re-watching the best episodes, you'll learn eventually .

So if you're already as old as fuck and don't think Picard eclipses all other genre gods are you just stupid?