Which should I watch? TNG or Enterprise?
- Thread starter SaturnVengeance
- Start date
This.
We'll never know what ENT would have been like if it had 7 seasons. But if we compare only the first 4 seasons of both shows, they're pretty evenly matched. And yep, as bad as ENT S2 was, it's nowhere as bad as TNG season 1. Nothing in Trek is as bad as TNG season 1. And season 2 isn't much better. "Up the Long Ladder" may the worst Trek episode of all time - and its only rivals are some of the TNG S1 episodes ("Code of Honor", "Angel One", "The Last Outpost"...)
And you know, just like ENT had T'Pol in a catsuit... TNG had Troi in a bunny costume. So why is one bad and the other isn't? (Not to mention that T'Pol was IMO a much better character and never as useless as Troi, particularly early seasons Troi...)
I like both but TNG has GREATLY improved my entire life.
But they were a far and away better product.
Star Trek wouldn't launch today with 1960's effects, so that is a logical fallacy. Enterprise with it sub-par first two seasons did see a third... so saying that The Next Generation would be canceled after its' first two is another logical fallacy. Star Trek and Star Trek: The Next Generation are so different from anything on TV today it would be impossible to predict how they would perform and what type of fanbase they would garner.
Doesn't it stand to reason that Enterprise would have a higher quality? I mean the production staff had only been making Star Trek for 21 seasons at the point that "Broken Bow" premiered. I'm disappointed that the quality of episodes dipped below "All Good Things..." with that much experience behind the camera.
I don't care what series you're a fan of, Star Trek: The Next Generation seasons 3,4 and 5 were not only good Star Trek... they were good TV.
Last edited:
*cough* "Threshold" *cough*
I would rather watch Angel One and Justice for 24 hours straight than be subjected to Imaginary Friend, Rascals or Sub Rosa one more time.
I picked the two episodes that most people consider the worst from season one. I, personally, don't find season 1 and 2 anywhere near as bad as some of the stuff produced by Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise. YMMV
TNG takes a while to find its feet, and the first season has a stramge dated feel. It's like a return to the 1960s' visual style, but with a very 1980s makeover. It's probably only consistently good from season three onwards, but the first two are still well worth watching in order to see the show develop and lay the groundwork for ongoing storylines. Season two's Q Who is a pivotal episode.
I think seasons 1-2 of TNG get lumped together unfairly. Season 1 is often pretty awkward to watch, but season 2 doesn't have that feel at all. Plus it has episodes like "Q Who," "Time Squared" and "Measure of a Man." And it has the feel of the rest of TNG, with Geordi as chief engineer at that point, Guinan added to the crew, Riker's got the beard, etc. Only the Pulaski thing separates it from the "finished" feel that seasons 3-7 had. Otherwise season 2 TNG does not stick out like a sore thumb like season 1 does.
So yes, ENT seasons 3-4 may be marginally better overall than TNG season 1, but that's comparing the BEST seasons of the FIFTH show of a franchise that had twenty-six television seasons under its belt at that point to the WORST season of the first TREK series in eighteen years, one that was finding its way around. Not a flattering comparison for ENT.
But if you think ENT Seasons 3-4 stack up against TNG seasons 3-6 then.... I guess different tastes and all that, because that's kind of stunning to me.
So yes, ENT seasons 3-4 may be marginally better overall than TNG season 1, but that's comparing the BEST seasons of the FIFTH show of a franchise that had twenty-six television seasons under its belt at that point to the WORST season of the first TREK series in eighteen years, one that was finding its way around. Not a flattering comparison for ENT.
But if you think ENT Seasons 3-4 stack up against TNG seasons 3-6 then.... I guess different tastes and all that, because that's kind of stunning to me.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
BillJ
"Star Trek wouldn't launch today with 1960's effects."
We're not comparing TOS or TNG as they would be filmed today with Ent; we're comparing TOS and TNG as they are with Ent.
The fact that TOS's, TNG's popularity had more to do with the tv environment during their airing than with their quality is a certainty.
There were a number of recent shows of equal or even superior quality that failed by a really large margin to reach TOS's, TNG's popularity.
BillJ, sonak
"But they were a far and away better product."
"But if you think ENT Seasons 3-4 stack up against TNG seasons 3-6 then.... I guess different tastes and all that, because that's kind of stunning to me."
The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'.
TOS is really old - about half the episodes are too cheesy or just boring;
In parts, TNG hasn't aged well, either - recently, I watched a few of the less 'popular' episodes (which comprise a large part of the show) - cardboard characters, formulaic problem-solving, etc.
Their episodic 'no consequences' format doesn't do them any favours, too, when compared to arc-based space operas.
I stand by my affirmation:
"The first two seasons of TNG are weaker then Ent's fist two seasons; and season 3 and 4 of Ent can compete with every TNG season you care to name."
"Star Trek wouldn't launch today with 1960's effects."
We're not comparing TOS or TNG as they would be filmed today with Ent; we're comparing TOS and TNG as they are with Ent.
The fact that TOS's, TNG's popularity had more to do with the tv environment during their airing than with their quality is a certainty.
There were a number of recent shows of equal or even superior quality that failed by a really large margin to reach TOS's, TNG's popularity.
BillJ, sonak
"But they were a far and away better product."
"But if you think ENT Seasons 3-4 stack up against TNG seasons 3-6 then.... I guess different tastes and all that, because that's kind of stunning to me."
The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'.
TOS is really old - about half the episodes are too cheesy or just boring;
In parts, TNG hasn't aged well, either - recently, I watched a few of the less 'popular' episodes (which comprise a large part of the show) - cardboard characters, formulaic problem-solving, etc.
Their episodic 'no consequences' format doesn't do them any favours, too, when compared to arc-based space operas.
I stand by my affirmation:
"The first two seasons of TNG are weaker then Ent's fist two seasons; and season 3 and 4 of Ent can compete with every TNG season you care to name."
The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
BillJ
"The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'."
Hardly. Unlike you, I said a few of the 'whys' that make TOS/TNG show their age.
"The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'."
Hardly. Unlike you, I said a few of the 'whys' that make TOS/TNG show their age.
No, you really didn't. You spout the same crap over and over and claim it as fact. TV stations usually don't repeat shows over and over that have no audience. The Next Generation currently runs in strip syndication, on SyFy channel and on BBC America. The Original Series ran in strip syndication for nearly thirty years, had runs on both TV Land and Sci-Fi channel and had a total clean up of the filmed footage and new special effects for a two year weekly run in syndication.
Seems to me that an audience exists for these properties to this day in the United States. Can't say the same for the siblings.
Get back to me when Paramount green-lights either Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, Star Trek: Voyager or Star Trek: Enterprise 'The Motion Picture'.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
BillJ
"No, you really didn't."
Actually READ what you quote, BillJ:
The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'.
TOS is really old - about half the episodes are too cheesy or just boring;
In parts, TNG hasn't aged well, either - recently, I watched a few of the less 'popular' episodes (which comprise a large part of the show) - cardboard characters, formulaic problem-solving, etc.
Their episodic format doesn't do them any favours, too, when compared to arc-based space operas.
I stand by my affirmation:
"The first two seasons of TNG are weaker then Ent's fist two seasons; and season 3 and 4 of Ent can compete with every TNG season you care to name."
"No, you really didn't."
Actually READ what you quote, BillJ:
The only argument you present in support of such affirmations is your 'taste'.
TOS is really old - about half the episodes are too cheesy or just boring;
In parts, TNG hasn't aged well, either - recently, I watched a few of the less 'popular' episodes (which comprise a large part of the show) - cardboard characters, formulaic problem-solving, etc.
Their episodic format doesn't do them any favours, too, when compared to arc-based space operas.
I stand by my affirmation:
"The first two seasons of TNG are weaker then Ent's fist two seasons; and season 3 and 4 of Ent can compete with every TNG season you care to name."
The episodic criticism gets tossed at TNG a lot, but this is an example of having expectations of a past show that are based on a current cultural context. Basically, very few shows were serialized like so many are these days. And TOS, which TNG was a sequel to, was also episodic in format. It would've been unrealistic for TNG to approach storytelling like DS9 did.
Yes, apart from the Worf-honor-restoration arc and some one-or -two-episode follow-ups to other events there were very few long-lasting storylines on TNG. But so what? Individual high quality stories can still be appreciated. Not every episode has to have long term ramifications to Trek canon to be good.
It's like criticizing Twilight Zone or Outer Limits for being anthology series. That's just their format, it's not a strike against them.
Similarly, calling TOS "cheesy" or "boring" just shows that you're judging it by what sci-fi shows in 2010 are like, which is just a pointless exercise. Time context matters. Special effects advancement matters. No doubt you find 1950 movies "unrealistic" for not dealing with sex or swear words in a candid way. Again, this is a silly way to approach older works of literature, media, etc.
Yes, apart from the Worf-honor-restoration arc and some one-or -two-episode follow-ups to other events there were very few long-lasting storylines on TNG. But so what? Individual high quality stories can still be appreciated. Not every episode has to have long term ramifications to Trek canon to be good.
It's like criticizing Twilight Zone or Outer Limits for being anthology series. That's just their format, it's not a strike against them.
Similarly, calling TOS "cheesy" or "boring" just shows that you're judging it by what sci-fi shows in 2010 are like, which is just a pointless exercise. Time context matters. Special effects advancement matters. No doubt you find 1950 movies "unrealistic" for not dealing with sex or swear words in a candid way. Again, this is a silly way to approach older works of literature, media, etc.
ProtoAvatar
Fleet Captain
sonak
"Time context matters. Special effects advancement matters."
Yes, sonak, there are good reasons for TOS/TNG/other older shows to have a 'no consequences' format, to have poor special effects, to have too much cheese, formulaic problem solving, etc.
This does not change the fact that they are so.
And the comparison between TOS/TNG and Ent/other newer shows is not about fairness. It's about determining which are the better shows from the perspective of a 2010 viewer.
"Time context matters. Special effects advancement matters."
Yes, sonak, there are good reasons for TOS/TNG/other older shows to have a 'no consequences' format, to have poor special effects, to have too much cheese, formulaic problem solving, etc.
This does not change the fact that they are so.
And the comparison between TOS/TNG and Ent/other newer shows is not about fairness. It's about determining which are the better shows from the perspective of a 2010 viewer.
If the 2010 viewer is 12. But at some point people grow up and begin to appreciate that there's more to the world than what is just outside their window.
Enterprise is just fine for viewing, worth watching, but I always have to go with the best ST series: STNG. Enterprise season 4 stands up with just about any other season of a ST show, and if headed in that direction for future seasons, I think Enteprise would have compared favorably with ANY ST show..but it was not meant to be.
RAMA
RAMA
Well, I wasn't saying those shows were INFERIOR for having those problems stemming from the context of when they were made. Far from it-I'd still take TOS of the 1960s, and TNG of the 1980s, unaltered, unremastered, and in all of their awesomeness over ENT any day.
I was just saying that issues like special effects and episodic formats are natural results of their time. I'm willing to overlook dated effects and some cheesiness because TOS and TNG had great characters, great stories, and they don't feel tired and worn out the way ENT did as it limped along for the first couple seasons on one-note recycled plots until it got some spark in it the last couple of seasons.
Similar threads
