Opinion circa 1987: TNG is NOT Star Trek

[Christopher]

The surrender in Encounter at Farpoint never bothered me. I always viewed it as a sign of how the Enterprise-D would be a very different ship because it now had a full compliment of families aboard. Picard' surrender was, at least by my interpretation, a sacrifice to ensure the safety of the civilian compliment.

It was meant to show that Starfleet was a more peaceful organization in that era, mature enough to recognize that sometimes it's better to yield than to fight. Also to contrast Picard to Kirk by making him less of a soldier and more of a scholar and diplomat. His surrender wasn't weakness, it was the sensible recognition that they couldn't possibly defeat Q by fighting or running, but only by buying time to learn about their opponent and either reason with him or outsmart him.

 

[Vger23]

It was meant to show that Starfleet was a more peaceful organization in that era, mature enough to recognize that sometimes it's better to yield than to fight. Also to contrast Picard to Kirk by making him less of a soldier and more of a scholar and diplomat. His surrender wasn't weakness, it was the sensible recognition that they couldn't possibly defeat Q by fighting or running, but only by buying time to learn about their opponent and either reason with him or outsmart him.

Agreed. I thought it served an important dramatic and tone-setting purpose

 

[Admiral Archer]

I was seriously hoping someone would either A: Write a fictional review of the first few TNG season 1 episodes from the point of view of a diehard trekkie from 1987, or B: Share an existing review of the first few TNG season 1 episodes from the point of view of a diehard trekkie from 1987.

I just want to see how the arguments against TNG compared to the ones against Discovery/Picard.

 

[JLBTucker]

To be fair season 1 TNG was crap by any measure

 

[JLBTucker]

And have to say i have never said DSC and PIC are "not star trek" I just think its "not good" and wouldn't blame people in 87 who didn't like TNG becuse the first season was god awful. Aslo TBF after re watching TNG again, somethings dont really work and things i liked when i first saw it I dont like now

 

[Mojochi]

The fact is, there's never been a Star Trek series that didn't have naysayers, turmoil, or issues, including the first, as its 3rd season often draws contempt as well. It, TAS & Enterprise all had their runs cut short. TNG almost never made it, & the cast were certain it would be quickly cancelled, not to mention is was a reworking of the Phase II concept that fell apart altogether. Some of the TOS movies were met with rebuke, as were most TNG ones & some of the Abrams batch as well, & now Star Trek series don't even get televised anymore.

The property has been in weird statuses over its entire life, & I've long given up any notion that there's anyone with a right to say what is or isn't Star Trek. Even Roddenberry himself couldn't claim true authorship of the franchise entirety. It's an IP, & subject to that governance

This title should have met an ignominious demise a dozen times over, yet it prevails, & here we are, past a half century still playing it out, for good or ill.

That said, I personally haven't been all that entertained with Discovery or Picard. As silly or inconsequential as they've been to me, the Abrams movies entertained me more. It's got nothing to do with whether it should be considered Star Trek. It's just that it doesn't work for me as a production in general, but I wouldn't tell you it's not Star Trek. It's got the name right there.

What I'll tell you is it's not the Star Trek I most love, & the percentage that is, isn't even that predominant anymore lol

 

[Imaus]

I have seen alleged newspaper clippings deriding TNG but they were very small, very early op-eds. If there was any resistance, it died quickly or at least evaporated after S2. And I think TOS fans could just go 'well there's gonna be more movies', VI came out in TNG's S4...though how VII came about, that might had peeved off more than a few people.

 

[garakvsneelix]

Of course, I understand, why someone could watch TNG after TOS and claim, that it is "no Star Trek anymore". However, for me, they solved this problem with the setting: TNG plays in a different century than TOS and so, many possible fractures could be explained with the fact, that you would possibly observe similiar differences between the 1850s and e. g. the 1960s/70s. As lazy as this excuse seems to be, it's one excuse more than DSC could give.

 

[Ar-Pharazon]

Exactly. God that first ep is crap. Just so MUCH shoved in.

The characters
"Meeting a God"
The Battle Bridge

slowwwww down guys!! Its like letting a teenager drive a car with a clutch for the first time.

But at the time the general sentiment was "It'll get better"

"I sense great despair and painnnn!"

 

[Christopher]

And have to say i have never said DSC and PIC are "not star trek" I just think its "not good" and wouldn't blame people in 87 who didn't like TNG becuse the first season was god awful.

Like I said, for those of us who grew up with the mostly awful SFTV in the '70s and '80s, first-season TNG was actually refreshingly good by comparison. I loved it at the time and didn't see its flaws until years later in retrospect, in comparison with the genuinely good SFTV we started to get in the late '80s and the '90s. And we got that improvement largely because of TNG paving the way.

It, TAS & Enterprise all had their runs cut short.

I don't think that applies to TAS. At the time, it was pretty typical for Saturday morning animated shows to get no more than a short second season, if that. Hardly any '70s Filmation shows got more than two seasons -- just Fat Albert, Shazam, Tarzan, and the Archie franchise (though that was several successive one-season series, much like how Hanna-Barbera approached its long-running shows such as Scooby-Doo).

TNG almost never made it, & the cast were certain it would be quickly cancelled, not to mention is was a reworking of the Phase II concept that fell apart altogether.

Phase II didn't "fall apart" -- rather, Paramount's plan to create a fourth network fell apart, so that Phase II had to be reworked into a movie instead. Heck, Phase II was the only aspect of that network plan that survived and came to fruition in any form.

now Star Trek series don't even get televised anymore.

Streaming television is still television.

The property has been in weird statuses over its entire life, & I've long given up any notion that there's anyone with a right to say what is or isn't Star Trek.

This I agree with. It's always met with criticism and resistance; indeed, the original series had a mixed reception in its day. But it's had extraordinary longevity compared to other mass-media SF franchises in the US, and I doubt it's going to cease to exist anytime soon, no matter how many more criticisms it has to weather.

 

[Skipper]

I was seriously hoping someone would either A: Write a fictional review of the first few TNG season 1 episodes from the point of view of a diehard trekkie from 1987, or B: Share an existing review of the first few TNG season 1 episodes from the point of view of a diehard trekkie from 1987.

I just want to see how the arguments against TNG compared to the ones against Discovery/Picard.

Once I read something similar from a veeeeeeeeeery old BBS (or it was a newsgroup?!?), but I don't remember it very well...

 

[Qonundrum]

There's a lot of criticism of ST shows after VOY claiming they're NOT Star Trek. TNG is like the gold standard when comparing subsequent shows. And yet, I've heard that TNG wasn't well liked for it's first two seasons and that it probably only survived to a third season because of its syndicated status.

Or even before VOY, or aimed at VOY too. Looking back, I get a different impression: DS9 was trying to expand the mold without breaking it and VOY was trying to return to the basics of TNG. It's the same with the newer spinoffs as well, and in a variable in terms of time people might like it one day or they might not. For numerous possible reasons. Or be ambivalent to them or love them or hate them. Art is still an individual experience.

TNG was trying to be a sequel, while some were claiming it was a reboot and trying to detach the 1960s show... the examples I started going into were so complex I could make a full post, despite their tying into another facet of the same theme this thread posits.

I grew up on TNG and it ended up being some cherished television memories. But when I first saw "Encounter at Farpoint" as a small kid I wasn't too impressed. Keep in mind I had only seen a handful of episodes of the original series but it was already "classic" in my mind. Star Trek was supposed to have a dashing, heroic captain, the second in command Spock guy, who was solemn and strange-looking with pointy ears, and Sulu.

Neither was I, but I was also thinking those snazzy book covers to hide our nerdy math and history books... with a picture of an 80s "look at us we're reliving the 60s too!" style show... would somehow make the owners/users of them somehow less nerdy... so glad the show hit the zeitgeist and non-nerds then decided to beat up on only Doctor Who fans instead...

This new Star Trek had some old bald guy as the captain! What's wrong with them? He's not going to be able to fight one-on-one with Klingons and alien monsters. Forget about any babes falling for him.

Worse, the third episode in he's terrorizing a planet's entire population with photon torpedoes exploding from orbit. Kirk never pulled that type of stunt, and over a situation that didn't need that level of coercion to begin with. (Case in point: "For The Uniform" (DS9) went the extra mile but the reasons for doing so were a lot more significant and reaching to begin with! Makes me wish I saw it on first run...)

This was pretty much the gist of my 7/8 year old impression of the show. Although it looked newer than the original Star Trek I had seen, it had a depressing look to it as well. I don't if it was the lighting or what, but I didn't like it too much.
Overtime the bridge seemed to get brighter, Picard seemed to be more heroic, the uniforms got cooler...everything pretty much just got better.

Yeah, I missed the bright and bold colors.

I missed Sulu. The show was about unity among all races and representation was pretty much the TOS's core bread and butter too.

Fast forward, and I think it's one of the greatest SF shows ever, and it's MY Star Trek. But I've been rewatching the early episodes from Season 1 and 2 and I don't know if it's the knowledge of the rocky start the show had, the online criticisms of the first two seasons, but it FEELS like a show that's going to be cancelled.

A lot of the cast didn't think it'd make a single year. The media was abuzz with "You can't remake Star Trek!" Roddenberry's whims taken to excess are far more prominent in the first half of season one, though we still get glimpses of this in later episodes. Admiral Hansen telling Picard bluntly about "old man's fantasies" about Shelby ranks right up there, but never becomes obtrusive in the way episodes like "Justice" were handled. Even "Measure of a Man" elevated a tawdry escapade into something with some depth and gravitas. That's amazing in of itself.

But little sci-fi existed at the same time, certainly with the cinematic-worthy special effects that propped it up.

But decades later and looking back, I see more in the episodes - uneven as they were - that had serious potential, or were even moderately successful. Heck, even as newer TNG came out and the older ones were re-ran, the older ones had more of a life to them whereas seasons 5-7 felt stale (and overtly preachy, which isn't always great even when you agree with it.)

I like the characters and premise. And despite great production design everything feels kind of cheap. It almost looks cheesy. And the pace is incredibly slow. I don't mind it too much as I have plenty of time to watch it and take in the atmosphere and scenery of the show, but it's a little unsettling. It very much has the feel of those various syndicated sitcoms that never made it past a first or second season.

For me, the pacing hasn't aged at all. It has a nice fluid flow allowing plot and character buildup. A lot of today's shows almost create ADHD by how fast they spit out scenes and umpteen side plots to distract. Ditto for 60s Trek - which is often more just a main plot than side plots. So in a way there can be a slowness - unless the main plot is so gripping and several are...

Riker is a pretty likable character character as the show progresses. Early episodes just feel weird to watch him. Maybe it's a case of all the actors getting more comfortable with their character and the dialogue getting better

I gravitated around Data and Geordi. I could relate to them the most with their techie personalities. I adored Guinan because I like mysterious, cryptic characters. (All of which was more or less ruined in GEN but that's a movie setting the stage for the films ahead of it... but who wanted to know where Guinan came from? Then they answer it, which led to only more and bigger problems - just how far into the Alpha Quadrant were the Borg to be picked up nearby by the only Federation ship in town? For one example of many...)

I did like Riker's brashness, especially with Ro... he could be a bit much toward Data, though.

There's definitely gems. Datalore is still great, and gave us one of the best Star Trek villains.

It's rough around the edges, but Spiner, McFadden, Stewart, and Wheaton steal the show. As had Spiner, but he's so good he needs to be said twice. Partly because he's doing a dual role. The direction really sells Lore as well. The ending where they decide to let DATA use a contraction was said to be deliberate, instead of playing it straight. (Ugh, season one for all its high points still sometimes opted to not tie the shoelaces before running that sprint and trips...)

I have yet to see the racist episode but I'm sure it'll only add to the feeling that this is NOT Star Trek and a poor successor to Kirk's crew.

Yeah, that's the one where Picard throws a tantrum and dishonorably lobs torpedoes into Ligon II's orbit and detonates them.

I'd still watch it, knowing how much better the show and characters are in all the other episodes. True, it's as racist as "Justice" (the planet of the blond hair-blue eyes) is but some plot points are fascinating. And a plus, Jessie Lawrence Ferguson pretty much carries the episode's watchability as Lutan, regardless of how generic when not unpalatable the script it.

I can only imagine the disconnect between watching the excellent Shatner movies and than seeing this.

With that said...looking at it purely as a science fiction show, it's incredibly interesting.

since STIV was the last Trek movie shown at the time and it was a ha-ha-bonk fest, with STV and to a lesser extent STVI also sending up Kirk and the gang in the preocess, TNG being serious in tone had some people wishing the Kirk movies kept the same level of seriousness. It was serendipity but that might be another reason TNG survived. If it took the same comedy routines, on top of everything else, it may not have survived. Especially as comedic side of Q has always been contentious among fans. Oddly enough, I adore Q too.

"Time Squared" feels cheesy, pacing is very slow, and everything just looks and feels depressing. But it's just an intriguing story and I love the mystery of it.

Sorry, just being silly. The mystery is great but seeing Picard question himself, as well as giving Troi something of some value to do, worked for me. It does have some cheesiness to it and I'll agree a couple scenes could be tightened up and padding reduced. But I feel it carries itself enough and with some neat sci-fi ideas. Season 2 has the show spreading its wings more, combined with characters that are finally feeling in-place.

 

[thribs]

Really? Felt like Trek to me.

 

[Christopher]

just how far into the Alpha Quadrant were the Borg to be picked up nearby by the only Federation ship in town?

There were two refugee ships, and the okudagrams in the movie identified them as being of El-Aurian registry (even though one was aparently called the SS Robert Fox).

Anyway, I always assumed that the El-Aurians had spent decades migrating across the galaxy and those two ships were simply the ones they used on the last leg of their journey. Refugees' journeys often have many stages; sometimes they never end at all.

Granted, Crusher said that Soran escaped the Borg aboard the Lakul, but that doesn't add up, because Guinan was on the Lakul too, and we know from "Q Who" that Guinan wasn't there when the Borg destroyed her homeworld.

 

[suarezguy]

I think it's also worth considering that, though the show became more popular and liked, won over some significant part of its naysayers, a lot of the people who didn't like it weren't won over, it remains pretty love-it-or-hate-it-which can be OK, if not better than most viewers being very lukewarm about a show, thinking it's bland and so not having real strong views about it.

 

[Thomas Elliot]

I missed Sulu. The show was about unity among all races and representation was pretty much the TOS's core bread and butter too.

Bruce Lee was a hero of mine growing up, so Asian male heroes always resonated with me and I also was a fan of Sulu. I wonder if that played another part subconsciously in my 7/8 year old rejection of TNG S1E1?

I adored Guinan because I like mysterious, cryptic characters. (All of which was more or less ruined in GEN but that's a movie setting the stage for the films ahead of it... but who wanted to know where Guinan came from? Then they answer it, which led to only more and bigger problems - just how far into the Alpha Quadrant were the Borg to be picked up nearby by the only Federation ship in town? For one example of many...)

I didn't like the idea of Whoopi Goldberg in TNG at first. I didn't hate it, but she was so well-known at the time it was hard not to see the ractor and not the character. Even back then I thought it was cliche, the wise black sage character. As the series progressed though, I really liked what she brought to the table, and the hint of a possible romance between her and Picard was nice. And yes, once they added that mystery to her when Q said something like "Picard, you'd should be wary of her, you don't know her like I do," she immediately got more interesting.
Was she powerful like Q at some point and now she's just slumming it, pretending to be a bartender to pass time? She also made a better counselor.

It's rough around the edges, but Spiner, McFadden, Stewart, and Wheaton steal the show. As had Spiner, but he's so good he needs to be said twice. Partly because he's doing a dual role. The direction really sells Lore as well. The ending where they decide to let DATA use a contraction was said to be deliberate, instead of playing it straight. (Ugh, season one for all its high points still sometimes opted to not tie the shoelaces before running that sprint and trips...)

Data kind of filled the Spock role, without being a copy. That kind of changed in the movies, where it's like him and Picard or best buds, and he even has a similar TROK death in Nemesis.
But yeah, Data was my all time favorite character at the time. And Lore...the dialogue he had and the line delivery that Spiner gave really made him memorable.

since STIV was the last Trek movie shown at the time and it was a ha-ha-bonk fest, with STV and to a lesser extent STVI also sending up Kirk and the gang in the preocess, TNG being serious in tone had some people wishing the Kirk movies kept the same level of seriousness. It was serendipity but that might be another reason TNG survived. If it took the same comedy routines, on top of everything else, it may not have survived. Especially as comedic side of Q has always been contentious among fans. Oddly enough, I adore Q too.

Q got on my nerves back then but I very much like the character now.

Overall, despite the many criticisms of the first two seasons, as well as my own that I've listed here, that's what makes me like them even more now. A lot of good sci-fi has always made me feel uncomfortable because it usually takes me outside of my comfort zone.
I hate to harp on this, but Picard being a bald, older guy as the heroic captain for example. Eventually, my own superficial expectations of what a noble hero should look or act like started to evaporate. By the time Picard was responding to Tomalak's ultimatum or defiantly yelling, "THEY'RE AH FOUR LIGHTS!!!" it was like, this guy is a bad ass.
Or what about how everyone on the Enterprise gets a long? Where are all the cool 80s action film/sitcom wise-cracks? The snappy back and forth arguing? This is too quiet. Later on I appreciated that there was a future where people work together and don't act like assholes, but are actually nice to each other.
Why are men wearing dresses on the starship? That's stupid. But later on I realize, oh, they're showing how in the future attitudes and fashion changed. It's something even Trek fans laugh at, but I think the idea is kind of cool. I'm glad they did away with it, but it makes those early episodes more quirky and even more SF in a way.

"Time Squared" is awesome. The pacing is an issue for many, and for good reason, but I really like how in a way, it adds to that sense of doom. I also like how Troi was sticking up for Picard when she still didn't know him as well as she would later, while the doctor was putting Picard's abilities into question.

 

[Unimatrix Q]

I was seriously hoping someone would either A: Write a fictional review of the first few TNG season 1 episodes from the point of view of a diehard trekkie from 1987, or B: Share an existing review of the first few TNG season 1 episodes from the point of view of a diehard trekkie from 1987.

I just want to see how the arguments against TNG compared to the ones against Discovery/Picard.

https://www.reddit.com/r/startrek/comments/a776td/not_bad_but_it_isnt_star_trek_the_internet/

In this thread you can find links to TNG reviews from 1987.

 

[Skipper]

A review of "Yesterday's Enterprise" from rec.arts.startrek!
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.arts.startrek/vb-HayIQREw

ere's how the ratings turned out for "Yesterday's Enterprise":

.950 on the 0 to 1 scale
9.50 on the 0 to 10 scale
9.55 on the 1 to 10 scale
3.88 on the 0 to 4 scale (A-)
3.60 on the -4 to +4 scale
4.50 on the -5 to +5 scale

***************************************************
** **
** **** **** *** * * ***** **** **** **
** * * * * * * * * * * * **
** *** **** * * * * *** **** *** **
** * * * * * * * * * * **
** **** * *** * ***** ***** * * **** **
** **
***************************************************

Now for the pros and cons of the episode:

+ Worf's hearty laugh at the beginning.
+ A space battle! What happened, did Gene go on vacation for a
week and lost his veto power?
+ Tasha Yar.
+ Not wimping out and bringing Yar back forever.
+ A plot.

- Yar's "Wes-like" hairdo..
- Why was Wes on the alternate Enterprise-D when no other children
were? The writers were correct by not having Worf or Troi on
the military E-D, but messed up with Wes.
- The local station running God-damn hockey scores by on the
bottom of the screen during the show. It's bad enough that they
throw-up their logo (so to speak) on the screen a few times. (I
didn't hold this against the episode for the rating, I'm just
pissed at the local station, which is one of the few in the area
NOT in stereo. Foo.)

With the exception of "Deja Q", this is the best episode since
"Matter of Honor". "Yesterday's Enterprise" comes in at second
place for season 3, and fourth place over all of TNG.

A lot of questions were answered about the Klingons, (who have
been at peace with the Federation for at most 22 years), Guinan,
etc. It's possible that it created more questions than it
answered, but such is life.

If Guinan has known Picard for as long as she said in the
beginning of the episode, how come she never met Tasha?

"This is not a ship of war, it is a ship of peace." --Guinan
"More like a ship of fools." --Otto
--HACK-MAN

DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed are mine alone (as far as you know).
--

 

[Skipper]

And this is quite interesting...
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!a...AJ/rec.arts.startrek/tmcktti93-I/s3wCC4f2KVkJ

coming out of the closet on TNG

How reliable is this rumor? I seem to remember someone saying they heard it
from someone at a con. Is this true?

It would be an unbelievable BAD idea to make an episode revolving around
someone's homosexuality. I can't believe that it would be as big an issue as
it is now.

If someone comes out of the closet, the reaction of the crew would be:

a) "so?" - meaning that homosexuality is accepted in that era, and no one
considers it any big deal. Not much of a story there, and no real reason to
bring it up.

b) "Aaaaa!!" - meaning that homosexuality got "stamped out" some time
previously, and no one can cope with it anymore. This, I think, would come off
enormously offensive to homosexuals, and would be a bad, bad move.

c) "Take a capsule of Heterocilin and call me tomorrow" - meaning that they
discovered that homosexuality was a disease that can be cured. Also offensive
to homosexuals.

(I don't mean to speak for any homosexuals out there, if there are any - these
are just my guesses..)

Can anyone give me a good reason why Star Trek should touch the homosexuality
issue? The sexuality of the characters in this show is IRRELEVANT to what's
going on. Even the thing with Data and Yar was just good for a chuckle, and
if they handle homosexuality like that, they might be in big trouble.

Gah...

BTW, look at the union between Sarek and Amanda. Isn't that SODOMY?

Anyway... some issues should be steered clear of on certain television shows,
and homosexuality is one of them - at least in a futuristic program.

Christian

 

[Skipper]

Now I would be curious what "Christian" thinks about Discovery ...