TNG changes to TOS
- Thread starter allstar77
- Start date
I also liked the skants for the men. As mentioned in a previous thread, I wouldn't mind rockin' the style myself.(lol) I do like the re-invention for the skants for females. (A shame we didn't have a reason to see Gates McFadden in one!) Instead of the long sleeve, it's now short sleeve. Of course, nuTrek now has short sleeves for the their skants.
One character I thought was a step up, in the first season, from classic Uhura was Geordi LaForge. They seemed to really play up that they had LeVar Burton on their show (who was still known for "Roots" at the time). I liked that they heavily hinted that he was attracted to Tasha Yar...which seemed that they might do something with them both in later seasons. Also, they gave him command in 'Arsenal of Freedom' and showed him capable despite hardheads like Mr. Logan breathing down his neck.
It just showed a character that was very possibly going to be a strong character, who happened to be black (and blind) and who was going to be on equal footing the rest of the characters...not too mention have his own romantic arcs.
Alas, the writers/producers 'nerfed' him - to use a gaming term. He became a joke with women and couldn't really handle himself in unarmed combat. He could be described as a 'magical negro.' (Kinda on par with Harry Kim...lol)
In regards to the phaser rifles and hand phasers: Um, I prefer the cool-looking hand-phasers and rifles from the classic series. (Believe it or not, I think the only cool-looking rifles in the Berman-era are from Star Trek: Voyager).
One character I thought was a step up, in the first season, from classic Uhura was Geordi LaForge. They seemed to really play up that they had LeVar Burton on their show (who was still known for "Roots" at the time). I liked that they heavily hinted that he was attracted to Tasha Yar...which seemed that they might do something with them both in later seasons. Also, they gave him command in 'Arsenal of Freedom' and showed him capable despite hardheads like Mr. Logan breathing down his neck.
It just showed a character that was very possibly going to be a strong character, who happened to be black (and blind) and who was going to be on equal footing the rest of the characters...not too mention have his own romantic arcs.
Alas, the writers/producers 'nerfed' him - to use a gaming term. He became a joke with women and couldn't really handle himself in unarmed combat. He could be described as a 'magical negro.' (Kinda on par with Harry Kim...lol)
In regards to the phaser rifles and hand phasers: Um, I prefer the cool-looking hand-phasers and rifles from the classic series. (Believe it or not, I think the only cool-looking rifles in the Berman-era are from Star Trek: Voyager).
Yeah, I remember that...you pointed out that you've got better-looking legs than me.
You're right, we never did see Bev in a skant...come to think of it, she was the most covered-up woman in all of Star Trek, for that matter!
I liked Geordi a lot, and it is too bad they dropped the ball with him.
Yeah, I remember that...you pointed out that you've got better-looking legs than me.
You're right, we never did see Bev in a skant...come to think of it, she was the most covered-up woman in all of Star Trek, for that matter!
Actually thinking about it I think the TNG dress uniforms look more like graduation robes than dresses.
Which doesn't really help much actually.
But he used to be a pilot. Ladies love pilots.Geordi being bad with women sort of fits...he is an Engineer.
Hey everyone!
Really interesting thread, I was reading it avidly last night.
I would like to comment something from the perspective of a person who grew up with TNG and found out about TOS years later (I lived in USA in the beginning of the 90s and then moved, so my cultural background changed abruptly).
I am yet to watch TOS in its entirety. I have watched the movies, but only about 10-12 episodes of the first season. To me the basic idea of these episodes is simple - an alien comes on board and starts manipulating the minds of people. I hope this plot changes as it quickly becomes rather predictable. So far I am unimpressed, although I still enjoy watching it, I like the aesthetics of it and the actors.
Anyway, to comment a little bit on what was said about TNG, I'd like to note several things.
0. From what I understand, it was TNG that made Star Trek as mainstream as it became (please correct me if I am totally wrong).
1. I really liked the comment about Enterprise in TNG being more an active political ship rather than the one exploring. I never thought about it, although I do understand that just exploration is difficult to pull off, since you then go into the loop of "meet a new alien - interact with said alien - defeated said alien". Not only one needs lots of imagination, the scheme, I believe, is very difficult to pull off for a long time and not repeat oneself. And it is exactly the problem I have with TOS so far.
So, TNG just being the flagship, being an important representative of the Federation sounds like a good story device to me.
2. Picard and Riker.
I must say I am not very sympathetic with Picard from first season. I agree with the person who said he is not likable. In fact, I wonder why Patrick Stewart was chosen to play a role like that and why him. He makes sense later on.
As for Riker, it is interesting. I first must admit that I really like Riker as a character. In fact, I think I like seasoned Riker even more. I think it is a believable transformation. The fact that he has a sense of humor and that he is a lovable guy does not necessarily go away later. I think it is sort of assumed, but you don't have to show it all the time. Each of us has many sides to our character. The fact that I am a lovable guy in general does not mean I am not serious or even strict in a number of situations (like when joining a fun Star Trek holywar )
Also, his character for me personally is enhanced by ST TNG novels like "A rock and a hard place" which holds a special place in my heart. I really like this book.
In my view, there are two problems with how Riker character was developed.
a. Riker's career
b. Riker in second half of the show
The point of "a" I do not understand and am a little furstrated by it. I do not see a reason why Riker was "pushed off" of Enterprise several times. That, in my view, ruined the dynamic of the character and made Riker look too seasoned and underdeveloped as a professional, without any need to do this.
Why wasn't Geordi told to go serve on another ship? Worf? Troi? Why wasn't Picard told to go and become Admiral? I mean, come on.
Pushing Riker to the "next logical step" is like telling a COO of Apple to go start his own company and become CEO. Of course, I understand that comparing commercial career with a military-like career might not be completely appropriate, but I think the analogy works somewhat.
So I do not agree that there was any basis for Riker to leave Enterprise after what appears like 2-3 years aboard the Enterprise.
As for "b", what I think happened was that Riker was rarely made a center of an episode after season 4. And so the character becomes more of a supporting character.
I would say though that there could be several good reasons for it. For one, Riker's character has been already well established. And so maybe the writers didn't wanna go there and decided to focus on developing other characters. Provided how different the crew was, I think they generally did a good job. They developed Picard, Data, Worf. Riker and Troi not so much. But then again, I think Riker and Troi are more "healthy" characters, you know, don't have that many issues.
I understand that Troi could be said to have "issues", but not ones worth exploring, I believe. Riker is a brave, confident officer, that has his charisma and handles his duties very well. I think it is normal to stop there.
Of course, there are good episodes that show Riker living full life. Like the one where he plays theater, "Frame of Mind". I think this is a great Riker episode.
3. And finally, I want to comment on the family thing. It never bothered me. In fact, I think it kind of makes sense. Why take families aboard? Well, because you can.
Also, I like the TNG Enterprise being such a big world, with many people doing different stuff. Enterprise feels like a huge town of its own. You think it has everything
All in all, I think TNG is a radically different enterprise (pun intended) than TOS was. TOS is about a smaller specialized ship on a mission. TNG is about a bigger world, a different time and a different kind of ship.
Really interesting thread, I was reading it avidly last night.
I would like to comment something from the perspective of a person who grew up with TNG and found out about TOS years later (I lived in USA in the beginning of the 90s and then moved, so my cultural background changed abruptly).
I am yet to watch TOS in its entirety. I have watched the movies, but only about 10-12 episodes of the first season. To me the basic idea of these episodes is simple - an alien comes on board and starts manipulating the minds of people. I hope this plot changes as it quickly becomes rather predictable. So far I am unimpressed, although I still enjoy watching it, I like the aesthetics of it and the actors.
Anyway, to comment a little bit on what was said about TNG, I'd like to note several things.
0. From what I understand, it was TNG that made Star Trek as mainstream as it became (please correct me if I am totally wrong).
1. I really liked the comment about Enterprise in TNG being more an active political ship rather than the one exploring. I never thought about it, although I do understand that just exploration is difficult to pull off, since you then go into the loop of "meet a new alien - interact with said alien - defeated said alien". Not only one needs lots of imagination, the scheme, I believe, is very difficult to pull off for a long time and not repeat oneself. And it is exactly the problem I have with TOS so far.
So, TNG just being the flagship, being an important representative of the Federation sounds like a good story device to me.
2. Picard and Riker.
I must say I am not very sympathetic with Picard from first season. I agree with the person who said he is not likable. In fact, I wonder why Patrick Stewart was chosen to play a role like that and why him. He makes sense later on.
As for Riker, it is interesting. I first must admit that I really like Riker as a character. In fact, I think I like seasoned Riker even more. I think it is a believable transformation. The fact that he has a sense of humor and that he is a lovable guy does not necessarily go away later. I think it is sort of assumed, but you don't have to show it all the time. Each of us has many sides to our character. The fact that I am a lovable guy in general does not mean I am not serious or even strict in a number of situations (like when joining a fun Star Trek holywar )
Also, his character for me personally is enhanced by ST TNG novels like "A rock and a hard place" which holds a special place in my heart. I really like this book.
In my view, there are two problems with how Riker character was developed.
a. Riker's career
b. Riker in second half of the show
The point of "a" I do not understand and am a little furstrated by it. I do not see a reason why Riker was "pushed off" of Enterprise several times. That, in my view, ruined the dynamic of the character and made Riker look too seasoned and underdeveloped as a professional, without any need to do this.
Why wasn't Geordi told to go serve on another ship? Worf? Troi? Why wasn't Picard told to go and become Admiral? I mean, come on.
Pushing Riker to the "next logical step" is like telling a COO of Apple to go start his own company and become CEO. Of course, I understand that comparing commercial career with a military-like career might not be completely appropriate, but I think the analogy works somewhat.
So I do not agree that there was any basis for Riker to leave Enterprise after what appears like 2-3 years aboard the Enterprise.
As for "b", what I think happened was that Riker was rarely made a center of an episode after season 4. And so the character becomes more of a supporting character.
I would say though that there could be several good reasons for it. For one, Riker's character has been already well established. And so maybe the writers didn't wanna go there and decided to focus on developing other characters. Provided how different the crew was, I think they generally did a good job. They developed Picard, Data, Worf. Riker and Troi not so much. But then again, I think Riker and Troi are more "healthy" characters, you know, don't have that many issues.
I understand that Troi could be said to have "issues", but not ones worth exploring, I believe. Riker is a brave, confident officer, that has his charisma and handles his duties very well. I think it is normal to stop there.
Of course, there are good episodes that show Riker living full life. Like the one where he plays theater, "Frame of Mind". I think this is a great Riker episode.
3. And finally, I want to comment on the family thing. It never bothered me. In fact, I think it kind of makes sense. Why take families aboard? Well, because you can.
Also, I like the TNG Enterprise being such a big world, with many people doing different stuff. Enterprise feels like a huge town of its own. You think it has everything
All in all, I think TNG is a radically different enterprise (pun intended) than TOS was. TOS is about a smaller specialized ship on a mission. TNG is about a bigger world, a different time and a different kind of ship.
Eh... I think it's really hard to determine. TNG did well, but it did in on the coattails of TOS enormous popularity in strip syndication and several pretty successful films. Without those two elements, I don't think a show like TNG would've ever been made to begin with.
This.
Thirded.
I want to comment on the family thing. It never bothered me. In fact, I think it kind of makes sense. Why take families aboard? Well, because you can.
Also, I like the TNG Enterprise being such a big world, with many people doing different stuff. Enterprise feels like a huge town of its own. You think it has everything
I also liked it, the people who don't seem to complain that it prevented having a lot of danger/action stories, and decreased the believability of the action stories they did have, but I liked that it forced the writers to diversify their stories.
While you are correct that TNG would never have been made without TOS, I think TNG transcended TOS within the sphere of popular culture during the early '90s. It had great ratings for a syndicated show, was nominated for a best series Emmy and became the TV show equivalent of a "household name." Time has not been kind to TNG (it's obviously a product of its time whereas TOS is closer to being timeless) so the popularity has waned, and the casual fan has moved on, but TNG was definitely king in the early-90s. I saw the remnants of that when it was added to Netflix Instant and the social media-verse blew up with former casual fans rewatching old episodes for a couple weeks.
Geordi being bad with women sort of fits...he is an Engineer.
Montgomery Scott was an Engineer as well and didn't have any trouble getting hooked up (e.g. Mira Romaine, Uhura - even though that came out of left field). Neither did Miles O'Brien. (I'm sure there are many other examples).
The writers/producers could have done better with the LaForge character.
I tend to agree for the most part but it was a show that overstayed its welcome and gave us four mediocre films too close to the TV series. With fewer seasons and better movies, TNG may be much better remembered by mainstream audiences.
Too much of anything, is never a good thing.
Even love?
Bzzzt - wrong.
TNG was greenlight BECAUSE of the enormous popularity of TOS in syndication, and the popularity and box office of the TOS feature films.
Also, TNG wasn't doing all that well in many local TV markets at the start. In many markets then sandwiched a showing of the new TNG episodes between two TOS episodes (IE they's air a TOS episode, followed by the new TNG episode, followed by another TOS episode.
Also, if you look in the background of TNG season one episodes, you'll see a lot of TOS era props and shuttle or ship models in the shots. Why? The producers were trying to scream to the audience "See, this show IS connected to TOS - really!"
As with so many things in life, there's truth on both sides. Yes, TOS was an enduring success and that's why TNG was able to be made in the first place; but it was always seen by the general public as something of a cult franchise, popular but not entirely respectable outside the fan community. TNG did bring in a whole new, very large audience and gained ongoing critical acclaim and award nominations, so it did serve to give Trek a wider mainstream legitimacy than it had had before.
Let me put it this way. When I was in high school in the early '80s, being a Trek fan was something that made you part of the nerd/outcast community, something you'd hesitate to admit to if you wanted to be popular. When I went to my high school reunion 20 years later and said I wrote Trek novels, I got nothing but "Wow, that's so cool!" in response. Star Trek absolutely has more public legitimacy now than it did before TNG existed.
Let me put it this way. When I was in high school in the early '80s, being a Trek fan was something that made you part of the nerd/outcast community, something you'd hesitate to admit to if you wanted to be popular. When I went to my high school reunion 20 years later and said I wrote Trek novels, I got nothing but "Wow, that's so cool!" in response. Star Trek absolutely has more public legitimacy now than it did before TNG existed.
From everything I've read, TNG was a success right out of the gate. Being renewed for a second season in November '87, about six weeks after its premiere. I don't know that I buy your info on it being sandwiched between TOS episodes, every market that I saw had TNG paired with The War of the Worlds.
Similar threads
