The "Too Perfect Crew" Stigmna

[Mojochi]

I think this criticism is vastly overblown. It does seem true that Barclay & Ro were introduced specifically to add more internal drama & conflict, but that in no way suggests that they didn't already have enough imperfections among them. Heck, Barclay was brought on in season 3 when the show was only just finding its legs, easily too early for them to be considered perfect to the point of dull. It also happened to be the season when Worf let a Romulan die despite objections from many of the others. They had diversity enough going on throughout

I mean, how could anyone seriously look at the socially isolated captain, his overbearing & pompous #1, the completely emotionless #2, the bleeding heart doctor, the 1 trick pony counselor, & the single minded security chief, and think they were overly perfect or sqeaky clean?

Sure, they excelled, worked well together, & came out on top in most cases, but isn't that what Star Trek is? Isn't that the very same thing TOS did? I'm not saying they weren't dull at times, but it's a misrepresentation to blame that all on being too perfect or not diverse enough, or lacking in internal drama. Dull just happens now & then

 

[T'Girl]

A big part of the problem is the depiction of the Enterprise Dee's crew as somehow being "the best of the best," and that everyone coming out of the academy wanted to be posted there, and Riker stating that people wait years to be posted there.

Pretentious as all hell.

 

[tomalak301]

A big part of the problem is the depiction of the Enterprise Dee's crew as somehow being "the best of the best," and that everyone coming out of the academy wanted to be posted there, and Riker stating that people wait years to be posted there.

Pretentious as all hell.

But the D was the flagship of the Federation. You have to have the best crew on the Flagship.

 

[Kor]

What exactly made the Enterprise D the "flagship"?

For the vast majority of the time, there was no flag officer aboard the Enterprise D, so it was by no means a flagship in the naval sense.

It wasn't the only Galaxy-class ship, either. So it wasn't the most advanced or powerful ship in the fleet. There's no indication that the Enterprise's role or function was really different from, or more important than, any of the other exploratory operations in the fleet.

Kor

 

[suarezguy]

I think this criticism is vastly overblown. It does seem true that Barclay & Ro were introduced specifically to add more internal drama & conflict, but that in no way suggests that they didn't already have enough imperfections among them. Heck, Barclay was brought on in season 3 when the show was only just finding its legs, easily too early for them to be considered perfect to the point of dull. It also happened to be the season when Worf let a Romulan die despite objections from many of the others. They had diversity enough going on throughout

I mean, how could anyone seriously look at the socially isolated captain, his overbearing & pompous #1, the completely emotionless #2, the bleeding heart doctor, the 1 trick pony counselor, & the single minded security chief, and think they were overly perfect or sqeaky clean?

I think a lot of critics somehow dissociate Worf from the series or feel he should have created more conflict more often.
More generally, I think they feel that Picard, Riker, Crusher should have gotten more criticism from the writers and other characters rather than having had their excesses generally accepted if not regarded as somewhat beneficial.

 

[Terok Nor]

I don't think any of them were perfect. They all had their flaws. The issue seems to be that they all got along really well with hardly any conflict between the main crew. That was a decree from Roddenberry from day one and the writers largely stuck to it for 7 seasons. There were times they came into conflict with each other but those instances were few and far between.

 

[T'Girl]

But the D was the flagship of the Federation. You have to have the best crew on the Flagship.

Why would "The Flagship" need to have a crew that was any more best than the crew of a non-flagship?

 

[Marsden]

I'm not saying they weren't dull at times,

You, sir, have a gift for understatement.

 

[Isolinear]

True, they were not perfect, but they were boring. The only interesting character was Data. The rest of them had the depth of a cardboard Chakotay-clone.

I like all the Star Trek shows, but TOS and DS9 are the only ones with really good characters.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

I prefer 'Too perfect' to the usual TV tropes associated with character flaws. Maybe the cast should have been more flawed but 9 out of 10 times flaws and conflict become formulaic and contrived. They fixate on specific flaws and lean heavily on episodes where two characters with opposing flaws are trapped together somewhere and fight first then have to learn to work together to solve a problem. DS9 and Voyager's most annoying moments often came from this formula.

The limitation on conflict may have stifled some good ideas but it stifled a lot more bad ones and forced them to focus on the adventure instead of just trapping Worf and Beverly in a cave or something and having them fight over mercy toward the enemy or something.

Imperfect characters, good. Specific flaws or quirks that become the focus of all character development, very very bad.

 

[Anwar]

True, they were not perfect, but they were boring. The only interesting character was Data. The rest of them had the depth of a cardboard Chakotay-clone.

I like all the Star Trek shows, but TOS and DS9 are the only ones with really good characters.

TOS only had 3 main characters (and that on good days, plenty of times it was just Kirk and Spock) and only lasted 3 seasons. They didn't have enough time to run out of ideas, wear out their welcome, become stale, etc.

 

[C.E. Evans]

What exactly made the Enterprise D the "flagship"?

For the vast majority of the time, there was no flag officer aboard the Enterprise D, so it was by no means a flagship in the naval sense.

Then it must be in a broader sense, of being the premier one of a group. I think it could be looked at as strictly a 24th-Century Starfleet honorific for its intended most high-profiled vessel and nothing more. It may be more of a public relations thing for the Federation than anything else, IMO.

 

[Mysterion]

I've always agreed with this particular criticism of TNG. Way too smug in attitude. One of the things that made TOS attractive was that is was asprirational in outlook. Okay, Kirk, Spock, McCoy and The Federation might not have been perfect, but they were trying to be better, and trying to do the right thing. This is a good message to see on a weekly basis - maybe things aren't perfect, but that's no reason to not keep trying to make it better. TNG (and VOY) come along and we get told that Earth and the Federation are paradise accomplished and nobody has to want/need anything and we're gonna go out and civilize the rest of the galaxy. Freakin' liberal-progressive wet-dream (we got ours and we're gonna make you all behave the same way as us!), but not so great drama in a weekly tv series. Fortunately, DSN came along and sterred the boat back in TOS' direction.

 

[suarezguy]

^Picard did occasionally pontificate against other societies but he was very adamant that they not use force to make others conform, in fact a common complaint is that he's too much of a relativist.

 

[YJAGG]

What exactly made the Enterprise D the "flagship"?

For the vast majority of the time, there was no flag officer aboard the Enterprise D, so it was by no means a flagship in the naval sense.

Kor

Given the history of ships named Enterprise going bye bye, would you want to be a commanding admiral on one?

 

[at Quark's]

I've always agreed with this particular criticism of TNG. Way too smug in attitude.

It's one of the reasons I appreciated Q. He may have been a jackass and I don't condone his actions, but one thing he did do whas take that arrogant attitude down a notch or two every now and then (in Q who showing them they weren't as nearly ready to encounter 'anything that is out there' as they thought they were, in tapestry showing Picard that 'the prudent choices that he would have made now' in life may, in fact not be the best choices and he couldn't just simply condemn his own behaviour in the past, because it did shape him to become the man he was, and so on).

 

[RandyS]

I prefer 'Too perfect' to the usual TV tropes associated with character flaws. Maybe the cast should have been more flawed but 9 out of 10 times flaws and conflict become formulaic and contrived. They fixate on specific flaws and lean heavily on episodes where two characters with opposing flaws are trapped together somewhere and fight first then have to learn to work together to solve a problem. DS9 and Voyager's most annoying moments often came from this formula.

The limitation on conflict may have stifled some good ideas but it stifled a lot more bad ones and forced them to focus on the adventure instead of just trapping Worf and Beverly in a cave or something and having them fight over mercy toward the enemy or something.

Imperfect characters, good. Specific flaws or quirks that become the focus of all character development, very very bad.

Bingo.

 

[T'Girl]

^Picard ... he was very adamant that they not use force to make others conform

Comformity can be accomplish through means other than application of force.

I'll give you "this" if you just change your legal code a tiny little bit.

Okay, now I'll give you "that" if you make a small alteration in your educational system.

Lovely, how about wonderful "trade deal," in exchange for a rewording of your patent laws.

in Q who showing them they weren't as nearly ready to encounter 'anything that is out there' as they thought they were

Given that Starfleet always come out ahead in conflict with the Borg (at a price yes) and that Voyager was able in End Game to destroy the Borg, Q was completely wrong.

We are (and always will be) ready for what's out there.

.

 

[at Quark's]

in Q who showing them they weren't as nearly ready to encounter 'anything that is out there' as they thought they were

Given that Starfleet always come out ahead in conflict with the Borg (at a price yes)
.

Which of course, plausibly shouldn't have happened. Just as it really is very implausible that Kirk would be able to confound a supercomputer (or a member of a more advanced race for that matter) with his logic.

But of course viewers don't want a dose of realism, they want to see our heroes win, so that's what they get.

One can even wonder if the Borg took those confrontations seriously or if they were just testing the waters. They never sent more than one cube at a time to earth, because they didn't think they would need more. However, to races whose defensive capabilities they did take seriously (8472, Arturis' people) they would send dozens of cubes.

And of course, to be able to let humanity defeat that one Borg cube at all, they had to introduce contrived achilles heels. They are centuries ahead of us, have roamed the galaxy and encountered thousands of species in conflict, but never thought of protecting their network against an external command, as we already have learned to do? All Borg cohesion dissolves when the queen is physically eliminated? That even flies in the face of how they were first introduced: power by having all resources distributed so that you simply never can take out enough (at starfleets tech level, anyway).

You can't use an antagonist that has been introduced as nearly invincible more than a few times, without making them caricatures of themselves. Unfortunately, the writers did just that, especially in VOY. (Incidentally, the same happened to Q himself -- he ends his career asking 'aunt cathy' for advice how to raise his son? Oh please.).

and that Voyager was able in End Game to destroy the Borg, Q was completely wrong.

We don't know that. All we know for sure, is that that transwarp hub -of which there were six- was destroyed, with the queen that was located there. But we don't have an inkling of how 'crippling' (to use capt. Janeway's propaganda) that blow to the Borg actually was. (Though I'm willing to believe that their activity in that region would be impaired for some time to come, at the very least).

 

[t_smitts]

What exactly made the Enterprise D the "flagship"?

For the vast majority of the time, there was no flag officer aboard the Enterprise D, so it was by no means a flagship in the naval sense.

Kor

Given the history of ships named Enterprise going bye bye, would you want to be a commanding admiral on one?

How many ships named Enterprise had really "gone bye-bye" at that point? The 1701 self-destructed during a rogue mission, without any crew aboard, when it was about to be decommissioned anyway. The "C" was really the only one at that point known to be lost in the line of duty (we have no canon info on the fate of the "B").