*Why* are TNG Seasons 1 & 2 Bad?

[Herbert]

I know the enemy would love it. They'd know exactly who to kill.

That's what the "away uniform" is for

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Maurice Hurley ran the show during season two, which was when it really found its voice. He also created the Borg, and wrote the episode "Q, Who" (one of Trek's very best outings, regardless of series). He also took his name off of "Hide and Q", placing his pen name "C.J. Holland" on the episode. He was likely a bastard behind the scenes from what I hear. But he wasn't in the same league as Roddenberry and his attorney.

Weren't the aliens in Conspiracy supposed to be the Borg?

 

[Live long and perspire]

Because of Gene Roddenberry apparently. For the first two seasons of TNG he insisted that the crew members have no conflict with each other because he believed that in this idyllic future he had built, humanity had done away with petty things like "disagreements" within individuals. The writers, in turn, had high turnover in these seasons as they argued that without conflict the characters were less human and there was just no way to make them interesting to their audience resulting in the lackluster stories put out during this period. In fact, Roddenberry make such significant rewrites that he almost killed the show, and it was only his unfortunate death in 1991 that allowed the show to evolve into what so many love about TNG. Watch the documentary "Chaos on the Bridge" if you haven't already and want to know more, it contains candid interviews with many of the executives involved with the show at the time and the negative effect that Roddenberry had on the show while he was trying to protect "his baby."

 

[TrekkieRiker]

I think they are excellent, save for a few episodes though.

 

[JesterFace]

Because of Gene Roddenberry apparently.
and it was only his unfortunate death in 1991 that allowed the show to evolve into what so many love about TNG.

I don't think Gene can be blamed for seasons 1 & 2 being weak, the show really took off on season 3 while he was still around.
I think seasons 3 and 4 are the best of TNG and Gene was part of the show at that time.

 

[drew]

I don't think Gene can be blamed for seasons 1 & 2 being weak, the show really took off on season 3 while he was still around.
I think seasons 3 and 4 are the best of TNG and Gene was part of the show at that time.

QFT. ST doesn't need soap opera style drama. That stuff usually seems forced for the sake of tension and never adds much when it's passable. Roddenberry had just enough of it (Spock/McCoy, Pulaski/Data, Riker/Picard) w/o going overboard in TOS + TNG seasons 1-4. Every character doesn't need some petty beef with another character. Characters don't need flaws for the sake of having them. Seasons 3/4 was PEAK TNG, by consensus. TOS was Gene all the way and the best of all series. Stop the Gene hate.

 

[TrekkieRiker]

The only season I did not quite like, myself was actually season 5. The others were, like I said, just great. It can be a very good lession too in life related stuff, like always in science fiction. I read lots of Sci Fi books and I found just such things there, but in movies and most series, not so much. Save for just Star Trek, and especially in TOS and TNG 1-3 and some in seasons 4, 6-7
When I asked a very devoted fan on how to introduce Star Trek to a completely Non trekkie, I was suggested to show them these first series. But I tried and their impression were not very good. So this can be true for some.

 

[lee249]

Early days and we were getting used to them in uniform. Wesley made a fine Ensign after he finally 'grew up' I actually like those old episodes.

I've got fond memories... Watching re-runs about 12 or 13 and my dad buying me strips of bubblegum to keep me quiet watching TNG.

He brought me back sweets after 12 hour shifts and shopping straight after. It's funny, sometimes the hardest things to remember are the important ones just a moment in history.