Was TNG considered a "family tv show" at the time? And anyway, what does "family tv show" mean?

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Which meant it was the first thing cancelled for any minor sporting event the BBC has the rights for. Like snooker.

I feel your pain. I get pissed when the local ABC affiliate postpones Jeopardy! for roundball or hockey.

Conversely, my own personal favorite spectator team sport, curling (on paper, it may look like a combination of shuffleboard, lawn bowling, and janitorial work, but in real life, it's practically a chess game on ice -- and it's timed like a chess game, too) never seems to get coverage unless it's the Winter Olympics. And even then, it's worked in when nothing else is going on.

 

[Commander Troi]

I thought curling was invented by drunk Minnesotans.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

I thought curling was invented by drunk Minnesotans.

Funny, I thought that was how hockey was invented.

 

[Commander Troi]

Nah, that was drunk Canadians!

 

[Qonundrum]

As an aside, I always felt TMP should have been rated PG, not G. I was probably just an oversensitive child (I would’ve been ten) but I remember being rather upset by three things in particular: the transporter accident; that barely-glimpsed guy in a spacesuit over Epsilon Nine who’s trying to flee but (presumably gets engulfed and) collapses; and what I would now call a John Carpenter-ish sense of horror in the Ilia-probe (“it’s sort of her but she’s dead!”, at least until the ending).

Oh peanuts, those are nothing compared to the themes in "Beneath the Planet of the Apes" and "The Green Slime" - two classic flicks that are both rated G.

Indeed, the following review never gets old:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Thank you, Reginald and Brandon!

Plus a few choice scenes:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The movie's loaded with this great stuff! But, hmm, violent struggles to the death, blood stains on walls, impaling, gruesome skin masks being removed, electric shavers for Taylor, that teensy nuke thing at the end. Yup, more rated G stuff, wheeeeeeeeeee!

Now imagine if TNG was loaded with that every week... well, once in a while we had:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Christopher]

Oh peanuts, those are nothing compared to the themes in "Beneath the Planet of the Apes" and "The Green Slime" - two classic flicks that are both rated G.

As we already discussed on the previous page, though, the meaning of the G rating in the early years of the MPAA system was closer to what PG meant by the late '70s or '80s. The drift in the standards makes it meaningless to compare ratings from one decade to another.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

Actually, "G" in the early years was exactly what it was intended to be, covering a range from outright children's movies to those that would be regarded as "mostly harmless, but of no interest" to children. And the "drift" came about because there was no rating to specifically indicate that a film's intended audience was unaccompanied children, nothing to indicate pornography, and nothing to stop filmmakers from deliberately aiming for a rating, or from spoiling "G" and "X" for general interest films.

Looking back with 20:20 hindsight, I would say that Jack Valenti made two big mistakes: (1) not having a rating for movies specifically intended for small children, and (2) being so spoiler-averse as to not give any indication whatsoever of why a given film received a given rating.

How would I have done it:
J: Juvenile. All ages admitted; particularly suited for unaccompanied children; may offend adolescents and young adults.
G: General Audiences. All ages admitted. Not necessarily of interest to children.
PG-n (5<=n<=17): Parental Guidence Suggested. May not be suited for audiences younger than n years. Content code optional.
R-n (10<=n<=17): Restricted. Those under n years old must be accompanied by parent or other responsible adult. Content code mandatory.
X-n (10<=n<=21): Excluded. Those under n years old will not be admitted. Content code mandatory.

PG, R, and X ratings can be combined, so long as the ages make sense.

Content codes:
L: Language (including gestures). May be sexual, scatological, blasphemous, or racist.
N: Nudity
S: Sex
V: Violence
H: Horror/Shock

The "J" rating would keep "G" from being ruined for general interest films; content codes (optional for "PG"; mandatory for "R" and "X") would keep "X" from being ruined for non-pornographic content.

 

[Qonundrum]

As we already discussed on the previous page, though, the meaning of the G rating in the early years of the MPAA system was closer to what PG meant by the late '70s or '80s. The drift in the standards makes it meaningless to compare ratings from one decade to another.

The recap is great, thank you. I am probably not the only person who was not going to sift through 14 previous pages where each page has 20 or so individual posts, even if perchance it would be on page 14. Just bad timing.

 

[Oddish]

As we already discussed on the previous page, though, the meaning of the G rating in the early years of the MPAA system was closer to what PG meant by the late '70s or '80s. The drift in the standards makes it meaningless to compare ratings from one decade to another.

Very true. Look at Oliver!, the 1968 Best Picture winner. It features multiple acts of violence, some of it surprisingly brutal in nature. Two people are killed, one of them beaten to death, and a child is placed in severe danger multiple times. By today's standards, it would be pushing the PG13 threshold. By 1968's, it was rated G.

 

[DarthTimon]

I think TNG was overall, quite alright as a family show. I started watching it when I was 10 (I think), and nothing stood out as especially traumatic. I think DS9, and to a point, VOY, did things in a darker, grittier way that would have been less family-friendly, but TNG never strayed too far from the PG-12A line (not to me at least).

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

This is a question that arose from the thread Pre-2009 Star Trek and LGBTQI+ representation: simple disinterest or active hostility?. One reason given for the lack of LBGTQI+ representation in TNG was that it was considered a "family show". This made me think. First of all I tried to understand what the concept of a family TV show was for an American audience. But reading some articles it seems that there is no single definition. It seems simpler to define what a family TV show is not.

But if we look at the first few episodes of TNG, well, it seems like the target was definitely not the whole family. In the second episode the Enterprise becomes a huge flying orgy. In the last of the first season giant worms are graphically exploded with phaser shots. Obviously these aspects were greatly toned down in subsequent seasons, but it never seemed to me that the intent was "let's write something suitable for both little Tim, 4 years old, and for grandfather Ezbel, 98". I mean, in one episode we talk about the pros and cons of terrorism. Doesn't exactly strike me as a theme for someone who then watches "He-Man".

I tried to find out and it seems that in reality, being a syndicated show, the writers of TNG had no control over what time the individual station broadcast the series. I have to find the article, but it seems to me that one of the reasons Berman gave for not mentioning homosexuality in TNG was that "in some parts of the country it is on at 4pm!".

So TNG strikes me as more of a show that someone can comfortably watch with the rest of the family, but not a "family show."

What do you think?

I was a kid in the 90's and found TNG mid-run before DS9 premiered. Yes, this was a family show, I watched it as an Elementary Schooler and learned some important lessons from the show that I wasn't getting from family and school. "Family Friendly" doesn't mean for little kids. Family friendly generally means pre-teens, teens, and adults, but probably not for a 4-year-old or a kid who'd rather watch He-Man.

As for why no gay characters on TNG, simple. The show aired in 1987-94. Did people during that 7-year-window have the same tolerance toward homosexuality that people have today? I remember being in middle school, and some boy I didn't know was talked about as "liking boys," and the kids acted like just looking at him meant certain death. I was more upset by the gossip than anything else.

 

[Skipper]

As for why no gay characters on TNG, simple. The show aired in 1987-94. Did people during that 7-year-window have the same tolerance toward homosexuality that people have today? I remember being in middle school, and some boy I didn't know was talked about as "liking boys," and the kids acted like just looking at him meant certain death. I was more upset by the gossip than anything else.

We've talked about this extensively in this thread. Short answer: There were already several shows in the 80s (and early 90s) that had LBGTQ-themed episodes.

List of 1980s American television episodes with LGBT themes
List of 1990s American television episodes with LGBT themes


Writers, actors, and Roddenberry himself (before his health deteriorated) wanted at least one story on this subject. But Bermann has always actively opposed these types of stories, going so far as to lie to the interested parties ("Yes, yes, we will soon do an episode on this").

Why he did it is only he who knows. When asked, he gave contradictory answers. I will avoid here the accusations leveled at him about why he behaved this way made by the writers who knew him, but let's say that it seems he was moved more by his personal beliefs on the subject of homosexuality than by valid commercial motives.

And if the period 1987-94 can perhaps be considered "too early", let's remember that on the same channel where "Enterprise" was broadcast in the 2005 there was a series with this regular couple:



But while Bermann was in charge, Star Trek was an absolutely LBGTQ-free universe.

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

We've talked about this extensively in this thread. Short answer: There were already several shows in the 80s (and early 90s) that had LBGTQ-themed episodes.

List of 1980s American television episodes with LGBT themes
List of 1990s American television episodes with LGBT themes


Writers, actors, and Roddenberry himself (before his health deteriorated) wanted at least one story on this subject. But Bermann has always actively opposed these types of stories, going so far as to lie to the interested parties ("Yes, yes, we will soon do an episode on this").

Why he did it is only he who knows. When asked, he gave contradictory answers. I will avoid here the accusations leveled at him about why he behaved this way made by the writers who knew him, but let's say that it seems he was moved more by his personal beliefs on the subject of homosexuality than by valid commercial motives.

And if the period 1987-94 can perhaps be considered "too early", let's remember that on the same channel where "Enterprise" was broadcast in the 2005 there was a series with this regular couple:



But while Bermann was in charge, Star Trek was an absolutely LBGTQ-free universe.

Are we talking main cast or guest stars? I can't think of any TV shows pre-2010's that had gay or lesbian characters in the main cast as opposed to guest appearances.

 

[Skipper]

Are we talking main cast or guest stars? I can't think of any TV shows pre-2010's that had gay or lesbian characters in the main cast as opposed to guest appearances.

The photo you see portrays Willow, one of the main characters of Buffy. In the early 2000s it aired on UPN, the same network as Enterprise.

Edit: if you want a more extensive list:

List of dramatic television series with LGBTQ characters: 1960s–2000s - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

The photo you see portrays Willow, one of the main characters of Buffy. In the early 2000s it aired on UPN, the same network as Enterprise.

Edit: if you want a more extensive list:

List of dramatic television series with LGBTQ characters: 1960s–2000s - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Buffy ran 5 seasons on WB, only the last 2 on UPN. I caught some random reruns, but I didn't really follow the show. I did tune in for the series finale to see how it ended. Went out with a bang. I'll check out the Wiki-link. Are these guest appearances or main cast? The link doesn't really say either way.

 

[Oddish]

As for why no gay characters on TNG, simple. The show aired in 1987-94. Did people during that 7-year-window have the same tolerance toward homosexuality that people have today? I remember being in middle school, and some boy I didn't know was talked about as "liking boys," and the kids acted like just looking at him meant certain death. I was more upset by the gossip than anything else.

Homophobia was just normal then, even played for laughs. I remember in "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure", the titular characters hugged, then stepped back, looked at each other reproachfully, and simultaneously called each other a word not permitted here.

But while Bermann was in charge, Star Trek was an absolutely LBGTQ-free universe.

Maybe Berman was worried about alienating the conservative Trek fan, who might have objected to such things... or maybe he was just really bad at his job.

 

[Admiral Jean-Luc Picard]

Homophobia was just normal then, even played for laughs. I remember in "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure", the titular characters hugged, then stepped back, looked at each other reproachfully, and simultaneously called each other a word not permitted here.

Maybe Berman was worried about alienating the conservative Trek fan, who might have objected to such things... or maybe he was just really bad at his job.

#1 How are we defining homophobia? Homo meaning gay, phobia meaning fear. I don't think people in the 90's were "scared" of gay people like he's some kind big thug out to mug people. I know on Frasier, the show did some gay-themed episodes played for laughs, but the punchline was always Frasier Crane himself. The man was so flamboyant, he made gay men look lumberjack grade straight, and it was hilarious. The best episodes are when Frasier himself is the source of the comedy. Anyway, I don't remember the original 2 Bill & Ted movies, so I can't comment on the scene you're referencing. Can you post a link to a YouTube clip or something?

#2 Part of his job is not alienating viewers, so if he thought a "gay" character would do as much, he may have honestly viewed that as bad for business.

 

[Skipper]

or maybe he was just really bad at his job.

Well consider that the only episode on the theme of "homosexuality" during his reign is the one where a character played by a woman and one by a man affirm how beautiful heterosexual love is and fight against an evil society that says otherwise.

 

[Sim]

Since I have a family, I wonder what a "family show" is ... for my daughters, 8 and 10, "The Simpsons" is a family show. It doesn't mean it has no content kids won't understand. The Simpsons has plenty of content kids don't get. But obviously, there are enough jokes for kids, and relatable characters, in it, too.

They also love "Lower Decks", but were bored by "Prodigy".

 

[Oddish]

Well consider that the only episode on the theme of "homosexuality" during his reign is the one where a character played by a woman and one by a man affirm how beautiful heterosexual love is and fight against an evil society that says otherwise.

I figure there was toe-dipping in both TNG and the Dax kiss on DS9. And I assumed that based on the controversy that came from those episodes, the powers that be opted out of any further same-sex romance.