To those around when TNG first aired: what did you think of it?
- Thread starter MikHutch
- Start date
I was so put off by “The Next Generation” title that I refused to even turn it on. A friend who was living with us at the time twisted my arm to watch just one episode of Season 2 with him so I kindly acceded. It was “Measure of a Man” and the hook was set. I was 20 when TOS premiered in 1966 and I watched occasionally but TNG launched the addiction.
I liked it from the start. I wasn't looking at it as some kind of continuation of TOS, but of the entire Star Trek Universe taken to the next level, so it definitely did that from the get-go for me. While I liked the show from episode 1, it really wasn't until half-way through Season 3 that it grew to become my favorite iteration of Trek at the time.
i think stewart carried a lot of the early acting before the others became comfortable in their roles
oh ya that's true. especially of s1 iirc. Stewart seemed awkward initially with the role. i guess they just gave more for him to do
Encounter At Farpoint was spolit for me by the Q-and-courtroom scenes which dragged and which just seemed to be padding. I am never very keen on children in adult programmes and my wariness about Wesley was fully confirmed by the way he was used initially. The counsellor just seemed like a complete drip...
Odd as it may seem "Code of Honour" was the first story for me that seemed like Star Trek as I knew it - and that was ruined by the casting decisions. The Naked Now was okay but just not as good as the TOS episode.
I watched up to Second Skin when they managed to kill off my favourite character at which time I abandoned TNG. I didn't come back to it until after DS9 (which had me hooked from the off) started. Since then, I have grown to love the programme but I still don't like Q.
Odd as it may seem "Code of Honour" was the first story for me that seemed like Star Trek as I knew it - and that was ruined by the casting decisions. The Naked Now was okay but just not as good as the TOS episode.
I watched up to Second Skin when they managed to kill off my favourite character at which time I abandoned TNG. I didn't come back to it until after DS9 (which had me hooked from the off) started. Since then, I have grown to love the programme but I still don't like Q.
Don't like Q? Dang, he has more personality than most of the regular TNG crew
In 1987, I recall more distinctly the book protector sleeves given out at school (in the AV club in the high school library, much to the surprise of nobody around here, and I must say the three-level library reminded me of the Engineering set, but I digress) with the season one cast. Wish I'd kept the book cover, but the instructor was happy that the book within was still in very good condition.
At first it was a lukewarm/like/dislike thing. Depending on episode, and some were baaaaad. Especially as TNG progressed and the show ditched the garbage and took itself seriously and with material that was easier to produce seriously (TNG overcame a lot at times), that's when the audience grew and ambivalence started to subside. Meanwhile I'm sitting through Star Trek V and getting all whiny over how the original crew treated itself as a joke. So did a lot of moviegoers. Fast forward a third of a century now, and one can see the movie's potential and appreciating what had worked, but - at the time - audiences were stunned after II-IV, but not by the special effects and not in a good way. Ditto for TNG, as - with others - I've gravitated toward seasons 1 and 2 as the 90s went by, and often returned to seasons 1-4 far more than 5-7, with some exceptions. Earliest TNG really did feel most exploratory, and the latter half was largely cardboard. DS9 getting the best plotting material didn't help, either. Or it didn't hurt, it depends on which series you were cheering for at that time, too...
TOS still had its iconic tone and big three. Yeah, it was 20 years old but it didn't matter. Others saw TNG as the big new shiny thing that could fix all the errors TNG had. Both sides had points and both weren't wrong. TNG proved over time that some thought could make a sequel better than the original... it did win me over or else I wouldn't have kept watching...
Keep in mind, the then-trendy issue of "You can't replace Kirk!" was very real at the time, additionally hampered more by how many late-80s shows were faddish sequels of long-dead TV shows from the 60s to recapture and build upon. See, we got to have so many timeless gems such as The New Monkees, The New Gidget, The Munsters Today, What's Happening Now, The New Leave it to Beaver, a ton of dead tv reunion movies with all of the latest trendy 80s incidental music styles (e.g. Bonanza The Next Generation, I Dream of Jeannie 15 Years Later plus another sequel, a few zillion Return of the Six Million Dollar Man & Bionic Woman TV movies, a handful of Brady Bunch reunion movies and a short-lived tv show, etc, etc), prequels such as "Muppet Babies", genuinely new series like "Miami Vice" and "Remington Steele", and probably a lot more that are stuck in my subconscious. Okay, to be fair, Miami Vice had its moments, and the New Monkees had rather decent music (if you're into mid-80s pop, some of the stuff is impressive) but dang that show itself was not the same), but I digress: With all these sequels popping up more than any average teenager's pimples as we were the target audience for this stuff, a little kneejerky reaction was going to be inevitable because everyone was expecting the next big thing to be just as stale. Then again, The Munsters Today lasted twice as many seasons as its progenitor, so there's no set rule...
The other issue, which helped, was lack of sci-fi - in terms of titles, or companies wanting to make it (or to make it good). Even TNG season 1 isn't as bad as some series from the same time period.
Will a new show recapture the "cultural zeitgeist" that TOS and TNG had? Dunno. Until then, the next best miracle is if someone finds a way to take a potato chip recipe and successfully swap potato for broccoli but with that same level of crunch everyone expects and craves, nom nom nummy-nom. Even then, they're more nutritious when steamed. So whip out the pot of water and colander, unless you can fling enough insults to enrage the floret in front of your face. Why I just wrote all of that, I've no idea... oh yeah, but then there will be a mega-super-successful show to veg out on. :9
At first it was a lukewarm/like/dislike thing. Depending on episode, and some were baaaaad. Especially as TNG progressed and the show ditched the garbage and took itself seriously and with material that was easier to produce seriously (TNG overcame a lot at times), that's when the audience grew and ambivalence started to subside. Meanwhile I'm sitting through Star Trek V and getting all whiny over how the original crew treated itself as a joke. So did a lot of moviegoers. Fast forward a third of a century now, and one can see the movie's potential and appreciating what had worked, but - at the time - audiences were stunned after II-IV, but not by the special effects and not in a good way. Ditto for TNG, as - with others - I've gravitated toward seasons 1 and 2 as the 90s went by, and often returned to seasons 1-4 far more than 5-7, with some exceptions. Earliest TNG really did feel most exploratory, and the latter half was largely cardboard. DS9 getting the best plotting material didn't help, either. Or it didn't hurt, it depends on which series you were cheering for at that time, too...
TOS still had its iconic tone and big three. Yeah, it was 20 years old but it didn't matter. Others saw TNG as the big new shiny thing that could fix all the errors TNG had. Both sides had points and both weren't wrong. TNG proved over time that some thought could make a sequel better than the original... it did win me over or else I wouldn't have kept watching...
Keep in mind, the then-trendy issue of "You can't replace Kirk!" was very real at the time, additionally hampered more by how many late-80s shows were faddish sequels of long-dead TV shows from the 60s to recapture and build upon. See, we got to have so many timeless gems such as The New Monkees, The New Gidget, The Munsters Today, What's Happening Now, The New Leave it to Beaver, a ton of dead tv reunion movies with all of the latest trendy 80s incidental music styles (e.g. Bonanza The Next Generation, I Dream of Jeannie 15 Years Later plus another sequel, a few zillion Return of the Six Million Dollar Man & Bionic Woman TV movies, a handful of Brady Bunch reunion movies and a short-lived tv show, etc, etc), prequels such as "Muppet Babies", genuinely new series like "Miami Vice" and "Remington Steele", and probably a lot more that are stuck in my subconscious. Okay, to be fair, Miami Vice had its moments, and the New Monkees had rather decent music (if you're into mid-80s pop, some of the stuff is impressive) but dang that show itself was not the same), but I digress: With all these sequels popping up more than any average teenager's pimples as we were the target audience for this stuff, a little kneejerky reaction was going to be inevitable because everyone was expecting the next big thing to be just as stale. Then again, The Munsters Today lasted twice as many seasons as its progenitor, so there's no set rule...
The other issue, which helped, was lack of sci-fi - in terms of titles, or companies wanting to make it (or to make it good). Even TNG season 1 isn't as bad as some series from the same time period.
Will a new show recapture the "cultural zeitgeist" that TOS and TNG had? Dunno. Until then, the next best miracle is if someone finds a way to take a potato chip recipe and successfully swap potato for broccoli but with that same level of crunch everyone expects and craves, nom nom nummy-nom. Even then, they're more nutritious when steamed. So whip out the pot of water and colander, unless you can fling enough insults to enrage the floret in front of your face. Why I just wrote all of that, I've no idea... oh yeah, but then there will be a mega-super-successful show to veg out on. :9
Last edited:
I loved it, and was all-in from the word go. I had been reading fanzines for years, so Star Trek was, in my mind, already an expansive fictional universe, not just one set of characters. I was not unaware of the first season's awkward aspects, but it was more Trek! Every week, on TV! I was eating up the new characters and technology and lore like a starving man.
but didn't you like the Ferengi hopping around like monkeys?
I was just 7 years old when "TNG" started, and I wasn't allowed to watch much mainstream TV. But my uncle liked the show, so we watched it together. I knew very little about the franchise at the time, having only seen a couple of the movies on VHS. But I was very impressionable as a kid, and my favorite characters were Wesley, Data, and Q. I would later get to meet all three actors, and they were genuinely nice to me. Brent is a cut-up, John is fairly reserved, and Wil was kinda tough to pin down. We only chatted for a few minutes, but he was neither over-excited nor depressed. It was more of a middle ground, at least from my perspective.
you know, i've yet to meet any Star Trek actor (but I never actually went to a con yet)
I grew up in the Dallas area for a large part of my life, and I was able to attend several conventions there from 2004 to 2014. But eventually, they became too expensive, so I was forced to quit.
I grew up in the Dallas area for a large part of my life, and I was able to attend several conventions there from 2004 to 2014. But eventually, they became too expensive, so I was forced to quit.
that's unfortunate
Yeah, that was definitely a tough call to make, because I really liked going to them. But when actors start charging you $50 or more, just for a signed 8x10...its gone completely out of control.
Similar threads
