TNG after Roddenberry's Death
- Thread starter Photon
- Start date
I'd say it slipped some and had a few good episodes here and there. When Roddenberry died what vision and inspiration he had went with him and Berman was left fully in charge without Roddenberry's influence and control and TNG, and the rest of Trek with it, progressively became more and more... vanilla? Safe? Generic?
Thankfuly, DS9 still managed to do some good, risky, bold things mostly thanks to Berman keeping his hands off of it and focusing his energies on sucking up/succumbing to UPN.
Thankfuly, DS9 still managed to do some good, risky, bold things mostly thanks to Berman keeping his hands off of it and focusing his energies on sucking up/succumbing to UPN.
Piller was the head writer but Berman was Executive Porducer so he'd make most of the final, front-line, decisions. He'd be the one to tell Piller what kinds of sotries he wanted done, or didn't want done. Berman was mostly insturmental in not wanting arcs or linear stories (to be easier shown in syndication or so new viewers could drop in without watching past episodes) not doing anything too risky or bold (i.e. no gay episodes) and for everything to pretty much be safe and sterile. Piller managed to get a lot out of his restricions but Berman is mostly responsible for the sterilization of TNG.
It was about the same all the way through, in a good way.
Gene died somewhere during the middle of season five's production and I don't think the show changed much at all. Really since season three it was Michael Piller's show and he tried to make TNG how Gene wanted it. I think seasons 3-6 were its strongest seasons thanks to Brannon Braga, Ron Moore, Joe Menosky.
I think Gene's influence was most felt in the concept and characters.
I think Gene's influence was most felt in the concept and characters.
Better. The first season was horrible. Season 2 was an improvement as Roddenberry was less involved that in season one. TNG from season 3 on was one of the best sci-fi shows ever before that it was one of the worst (until that time anyways).
The difference (for me) between Roddenberry-influenced TNG (mainly seasons 1&2) and post-Roddenberry TNG (3-7) was the first seasons were more sci-fi oriented stories ("Where No One Has Gone Before"-type) whereas the latter seasons drifted more towards fantasy ("Sub Rosa"-type).
The same could be said of TOS during the first 2 seasons and the more fantasy-oriented 3rd season.
The same could be said of TOS during the first 2 seasons and the more fantasy-oriented 3rd season.
They were better structured stories too, and the characters had more potential, but they were horribly executed.
I often say that TNG seasons 1 & 2 were the worst seasons of Star Trek, and were also the last seasons of Star Trek. What came next was better in some ways and worse in others, but it was indisputably something different.
Deleted 2
Vice Admiral
I liked Season 1&2 Picard. He was a much sterner, much less friendly character that, interestingly, drew a much better performance out of Stewart than the more 'open' Picard of the later seasons.
Season 1 is interesting in the sense that so very few of its stories work as drama, which is one of the areas where you'd expect a creative team composed of sixties tv writers to excel.
If we treat the tv show as a mixture of creative ingredients, you could say that the ratio of drama to sci-fi was increased as the seasons progressed. But it never quite matched the Original series as a blend, which was almost pure drama with occasionally relevant sci-fi trappings.
Season 1 is interesting in the sense that so very few of its stories work as drama, which is one of the areas where you'd expect a creative team composed of sixties tv writers to excel.
If we treat the tv show as a mixture of creative ingredients, you could say that the ratio of drama to sci-fi was increased as the seasons progressed. But it never quite matched the Original series as a blend, which was almost pure drama with occasionally relevant sci-fi trappings.
Now, I don't wanna get off on a rant here, but I'm going to say something that'll probably get me banned here.
I don't like any Trek that Roddenberry had a direct hand in.
TOS? I can appreciate what it did, and what it set up...but I don't think it's aging well. It's the late 1960's in space, not the late 2260's in space. Hell, only 40 years later, we have better technology in some respects than what he was calling for 260 years from now.
BEHOLD THE CAMERA OF THE FUTURE!
Way to think outside of the box there Gene. Perhaps you should have people signing printed off documents and only have the Presidents go up to Johnson when you review American History.
I dunno. Perhaps if I grew up with TOS, I’d see it a different way. But I didn’t, so it’s cheesy-dated fluff to me.
TMP? If I wanted to have a dialogueless acid-trip for two hours, I would take a hit of acid and not talk for two hours. If ST:2 was anything like ST:1, we probably wouldn’t have this website dedicated to Trek.
TNG 1/2? Sometimes there's a glimmer of later TNG in there, but often times it's ruined by cutting edge (read as: Horribly dated) hair, makeup, costuming, and/or set degign. Data for some reason is an idiot in the first two seasons, the scripting is weak with Yar. Geordi can see the things Troi is screaming about.
"I SENSE PAIN!"
Thanks.
Wesley...is...well...Wesley. Riker was supposed to be the Kirk of the E-D. However, when you have all this technology around you, it sorta defeats the purpose of having a barrel chested adventurer. Hell, there are even parts of TNG that seem dated from seasons one and two. Picard’s "print out" line from EaF makes me invision a dox matrix printer scrolling out reams of "Stay where you are" very loudly. Then you have the lame attempts at humor, which never worked. The light theme at the end when Data made a funny, Riker looked at Picard with puppy dog eyes, asked a rhetorical question, and then Picard (the wise old man) made a speech about how mankind was something something and how it was something else to do something.
Wash rinse repeat.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
I don't like any Trek that Roddenberry had a direct hand in.
TOS? I can appreciate what it did, and what it set up...but I don't think it's aging well. It's the late 1960's in space, not the late 2260's in space. Hell, only 40 years later, we have better technology in some respects than what he was calling for 260 years from now.
BEHOLD THE CAMERA OF THE FUTURE!
Way to think outside of the box there Gene. Perhaps you should have people signing printed off documents and only have the Presidents go up to Johnson when you review American History.
I dunno. Perhaps if I grew up with TOS, I’d see it a different way. But I didn’t, so it’s cheesy-dated fluff to me.
TMP? If I wanted to have a dialogueless acid-trip for two hours, I would take a hit of acid and not talk for two hours. If ST:2 was anything like ST:1, we probably wouldn’t have this website dedicated to Trek.
TNG 1/2? Sometimes there's a glimmer of later TNG in there, but often times it's ruined by cutting edge (read as: Horribly dated) hair, makeup, costuming, and/or set degign. Data for some reason is an idiot in the first two seasons, the scripting is weak with Yar. Geordi can see the things Troi is screaming about.
"I SENSE PAIN!"
Thanks.
Wesley...is...well...Wesley. Riker was supposed to be the Kirk of the E-D. However, when you have all this technology around you, it sorta defeats the purpose of having a barrel chested adventurer. Hell, there are even parts of TNG that seem dated from seasons one and two. Picard’s "print out" line from EaF makes me invision a dox matrix printer scrolling out reams of "Stay where you are" very loudly. Then you have the lame attempts at humor, which never worked. The light theme at the end when Data made a funny, Riker looked at Picard with puppy dog eyes, asked a rhetorical question, and then Picard (the wise old man) made a speech about how mankind was something something and how it was something else to do something.
Wash rinse repeat.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
No I tend to agree but I think its slightly unfair to judge the technological vision of the future.
We all create a future in our own mind based off the available technology to create such an imagination.
However I didnt care for the TNG Gene had his hands in either.
Many TOS Fundamentalists have said that TNG's 1st and 2nd seasons were tolerable but it ended after that.
Most notably because it tried to mimmick TOS but TNG wasnt the powerhouse it came to be known as with an estimated 30 Million viewers per week until it STOPPED trying to be TOS which I doubt would have happened if Gene continued his "contributions" to TNG.
We all create a future in our own mind based off the available technology to create such an imagination.
However I didnt care for the TNG Gene had his hands in either.
Many TOS Fundamentalists have said that TNG's 1st and 2nd seasons were tolerable but it ended after that.
Most notably because it tried to mimmick TOS but TNG wasnt the powerhouse it came to be known as with an estimated 30 Million viewers per week until it STOPPED trying to be TOS which I doubt would have happened if Gene continued his "contributions" to TNG.
Squiggyfm said:
Now, I don't wanna get off on a rant here, but I'm going to say something that'll probably get me banned here.
I don't like any Trek that Roddenberry had a direct hand in.
TOS? I can appreciate what it did, and what it set up...but I don't think it's aging well. It's the late 1960's in space, not the late 2260's in space. Hell, only 40 years later, we have better technology in some respects than what he was calling for 260 years from now.
BEHOLD THE CAMERA OF THE FUTURE!
Way to think outside of the box there Gene. Perhaps you should have people signing printed off documents and only have the Presidents go up to Johnson when you review American History.
I dunno. Perhaps if I grew up with TOS, I’d see it a different way. But I didn’t, so it’s cheesy-dated fluff to me.
TMP? If I wanted to have a dialogueless acid-trip for two hours, I would take a hit of acid and not talk for two hours. If ST:2 was anything like ST:1, we probably wouldn’t have this website dedicated to Trek.
TNG 1/2? Sometimes there's a glimmer of later TNG in there, but often times it's ruined by cutting edge (read as: Horribly dated) hair, makeup, costuming, and/or set degign. Data for some reason is an idiot in the first two seasons, the scripting is weak with Yar. Geordi can see the things Troi is screaming about.
"I SENSE PAIN!"
Thanks.
Wesley...is...well...Wesley. Riker was supposed to be the Kirk of the E-D. However, when you have all this technology around you, it sorta defeats the purpose of having a barrel chested adventurer. Hell, there are even parts of TNG that seem dated from seasons one and two. Picard’s "print out" line from EaF makes me invision a dox matrix printer scrolling out reams of "Stay where you are" very loudly. Then you have the lame attempts at humor, which never worked. The light theme at the end when Data made a funny, Riker looked at Picard with puppy dog eyes, asked a rhetorical question, and then Picard (the wise old man) made a speech about how mankind was something something and how it was something else to do something.
Wash rinse repeat.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
While I don't care whether GR had a hand in it or not - I feel EXACTLY the opposite; that TOS has aged way better then TNG overall. It may be my aversion to the 'PC' undercurrent of TNG; and the fact that overall, TNG has always come across as ver bland when compared to TOS.
Would you criticize the US Calvary in the 1800s for not riding into battle with tanks instead of horses? It’s the same thing when you bad mouth TOS and TNG for their special effects and hardware. They are products of the era in which they are made. All the wonderful special effects that are being used today will look just as bad 40 years from now in just the same manner as everyone says TOS and TNG looks today.
Similar threads
