'C' would be the worst option.
Unchanging, stagnant. No movement and without hope of any change that could spark evolution.
Hmm. ST:TNG (S:1, & 2)was Fukuyama's 'end of History' meme incarnate...
*Why* are TNG Seasons 1 & 2 Bad?
- Thread starter Emperor Norton
- Start date
Unchanging, stagnant. No movement and without hope of any change that could spark evolution.
Hmm. ST:TNG (S:1, & 2)was Fukuyama's 'end of History' meme incarnate...
I have read that at that point, Roddenberry thought 24th century people would have no fear of dying and would not mourn death, but would view it as simply another part of life. Even children. Which, to quote Maurice Hurley, is coo-coo and wacky doodle.
Last edited:
I haven't watched every single episode of season 1 and 2 so which episode is this. I have to see it now to make my own mind up on this.
Roddenberry was a bit wackadoodle.
This is of course just my opinion, but I agree with you particularly about the musical scores - they are overdramatic to the point of eliciting giggles.
I rewatched a number of 1st season TNG episodes, and the feeling that kept coming across with many of them is that there was a terrific concept behind a number of them that was botched. I've heard many stories about 1st season writers for TNG having their scripts rewritten, and frankly from the material presented, I believe it. Some of the episodes are so bad that they are almost a completely different show than what happened with TNG mid season 3 onwards.
Yeah, I've heard about this. Still, when you compare to how much Tasha's death rocked everyone, it just makes their rather glib reaction to this guy's stick out even more. I mean can you imagine if Data were smoking a pipe and impersonating Sherlock Holmes at Tasha's memorial? Somehow, I think more than Picard would be irritated, and not just because he's smoking a pipe.
Lonely Among Us
As off as the early seasons score sounds at times (not to mention definitively 80s) it at least has more presence than the auditory wallpaper we got stuck with after Berman gained authority.
Oh boy. Oh boy.
I just put myself through "Where No One Has Gone Before" and "Lonely Among Us" and that was time I wish I could get back. What were the writers smoking when these two got the green light?
Worst Star Trek ever
I just put myself through "Where No One Has Gone Before" and "Lonely Among Us" and that was time I wish I could get back. What were the writers smoking when these two got the green light?
Worst Star Trek ever
There are things I find charming about early TNG. One is the newness. There is a vibe that it is totally starting from nothing. It isn't bumping up against any canon like DS9 or VOY, because there is no canon other than TOS, which is treated as a distant ancestor with no bearing on the present. Secondly is how the expanded universe from 1987 to 1989 treated things, because there was nothing to go off of but TOS for Star Trek fans while the TNG era was establishing itself. TNG was not focusing on TOS due to Roddenberry, so there are books that would do the 24th century versions of these TOS things, which TNG as a series treated like a redheaded stepchild. Some violated later canon, but some fit. They did one about the Roman planet, for example, which had become a Federation member. Where those things differ from later canon, it is charming.
Roddenberry did do a lot of drugs in the 70s, which was one reason why his faculties were so diminished by the mid-80s. But a lot of the blame for the behind-the-scenes havoc of those first two seasons goes to Roddenberry's scumbag attorney, Leonard Maizlish. Gene wasn't up to the grind of TV production at this point in his life, so Maizlish was calling a lot of the shots. This led to some horrible creative decisions and was responsible for the revolving door of writers the show had during those first two years.
I recommend "Chaos on the Bridge", which is on Netflix at the moment. My only criticisms are that it is too short (it's long, but you want more, which is a good thing), and I think the emphasis on power as the theme is not really the proper theme for the documentary. The theme from what everyone is saying in the interviews is really more Roddenberry as a complicated person and how he impacted the show because of what he did and everything around him by that point in his life, and his eventual decline and how the show slipped from him. It is the show as a reflection of Roddenberry, alongside business politics and personalities. Power is part of that, but it is only part.
Eh, not so sure about that myself. I think Ridley Scott's Alien franchise plays out option C, perhaps with a tinge of option A. I can see humanity staying mostly the same for another 200 years, with only advances in technology. I mean, realistically, in the last 500 years, other than improvements in civil rights and equality, humanity isn't much different at all than we were in the 17th century, or really earlier.
I think it's reasonable to say humanity does evolve more than we give it credit for. There's things that no one would bat an eye at in the past which we'd give a what-the-f response to if we saw it, not just in terms of major things like civil rights, but in terms of these now improper or weird things that were just things people did, subtle and major. Human qualities are there but we do refine ourselves.
And no one bats an eyelid if you kill an ambassador and eat them. 
And no one bats an eyelid if you kill an ambassador and eat them.
...and zany hilarity ensues!
At least Lonely wasn't as creepy as the one with the Traveller
"Lonely Among Us" seems like it was shot whilst the boss was not around on a balmy summers day.
Stewart is having fun letting the hair (he has left on his head) down with a smarmy villain act, Spiner is fooling around with his Sherlock Holmes paraphenalia, the writers just aren't bothered about how they are going to restore Picard from being a puff of gas, Crosby, Frakes and Alaimo are cracking each other up with some culinary cannibal dialogue and everyone knocks off at 3pm for an impromptu picnic on the Paramount Lawn because it's just too damn hot to be indoors. I'm sure no Ambassadors, alien or otherwise, were harmed in the making of that picnic.
Stewart is having fun letting the hair (he has left on his head) down with a smarmy villain act, Spiner is fooling around with his Sherlock Holmes paraphenalia, the writers just aren't bothered about how they are going to restore Picard from being a puff of gas, Crosby, Frakes and Alaimo are cracking each other up with some culinary cannibal dialogue and everyone knocks off at 3pm for an impromptu picnic on the Paramount Lawn because it's just too damn hot to be indoors. I'm sure no Ambassadors, alien or otherwise, were harmed in the making of that picnic.
Last edited:
I already had know about Maizlish for many years (it was still entertaining to see him enacted) but one of the things that Chaos On The Bridge highlighted was the fact that Roddenberry was interested in retirement just before Paramount announced they were going to do another series. This is illuminating, and it explains much - particularly the Maizlish aspect of it all. I suspect that Gene was simply interested in a final big payday, and one more stab at Paramount to grab power back (after it was lost during the original cast's film series). The fact that he would allow a lawyer to walk all over longtime friends/collaborators such as Justman, Fontana, and Gerrold (and the writers in general) speaks volumes about his state of mind. No television producer of any competence or professionalism would allow a lawyer to do re-writes or notes on scripts, or provide creative direction - certainly not one who was interested in a show that would survive and thrive. I think that his decline was in evidence right from the start of TNG.
It had no sense of self. It was both beholden to TOS & trying to be its own thing, which wasn't established yet. NO ONE knew where they stood or in some cases what they were even supposed to be doing. EVERY character was just a vague synopsis tossed in front of a camera, like spaghetti against a wall.
The production crew had the unprecedented task of trying to rekindle the kind of storytelling of TOS, while also trying to represent the cinematic qualities of the movie franchise, all the while, trying to establish their own unique niche. The most frequent result was that it didn't feel genuine at its best & was a total train wreck at its worst
Don't get me wrong. I'm OK with a lot of those seasons. Despite all the faults & obstacles, there are many seeds of good stuff in there & even some episodes I like. It was just bad footing all around. Stewart didn't even unpack his luggage
The production crew had the unprecedented task of trying to rekindle the kind of storytelling of TOS, while also trying to represent the cinematic qualities of the movie franchise, all the while, trying to establish their own unique niche. The most frequent result was that it didn't feel genuine at its best & was a total train wreck at its worst
Don't get me wrong. I'm OK with a lot of those seasons. Despite all the faults & obstacles, there are many seeds of good stuff in there & even some episodes I like. It was just bad footing all around. Stewart didn't even unpack his luggage
I don't find the TNG season 1 and 2 bad. There are some very good episodes in both of them.
I wasn't that impressed when I first watched "Encounter At Fairpoint". I had seen the TOS movies and a few TOS episodes and really liked them. My first impression of TNG was "is that all there is?", after seeing TOS I simply expected something even better.
But slowly the series and the characters started to grow on me. OK, I wan't that impressed by "The Naked Now" and "Code Of Honor" either but from "The Last Outpost"things started to change. I began to like the characters more and more and at the end of season 1, I was a TNG fan.
Episodes like "Where No One Has Gone Before", "The Battle", "Hide and Q", "Datalore", "Skin Of Evil", "Conspiracy" and "The Neutral Zone" are excellent.
However, I was very dissapointed when Tasha yar was killed off (despite finding "Skin Of Evil" a very exciting episode" and I was even more dissapointed when Dr Crusher was dropped and Pulaski came in.
I never liked Pulaski and I was very happy when Crusher returned. However, in recent years while rewatching TNG, I've appreciated Pulaski more than I did back then. Still, I find Crusher better and it actually pleases me that those iin charge had the grace to realize their mistake and bring her back. (I wish that they had did the same to a certain Voyager character too.)
As for Tasha Yar, I must admit that I never liked the Sela plot. It was silly.
As for season 2, it had a lot of good episodes too.
But it was in season 3 the series really took off and it was excellent all the way up to the end.
I guess the reason why seasons 1 and 2 seems "bad" to some people are because the following seasons are so incredibly good!
I wasn't that impressed when I first watched "Encounter At Fairpoint". I had seen the TOS movies and a few TOS episodes and really liked them. My first impression of TNG was "is that all there is?", after seeing TOS I simply expected something even better.
But slowly the series and the characters started to grow on me. OK, I wan't that impressed by "The Naked Now" and "Code Of Honor" either but from "The Last Outpost"things started to change. I began to like the characters more and more and at the end of season 1, I was a TNG fan.
Episodes like "Where No One Has Gone Before", "The Battle", "Hide and Q", "Datalore", "Skin Of Evil", "Conspiracy" and "The Neutral Zone" are excellent.
However, I was very dissapointed when Tasha yar was killed off (despite finding "Skin Of Evil" a very exciting episode" and I was even more dissapointed when Dr Crusher was dropped and Pulaski came in.
I never liked Pulaski and I was very happy when Crusher returned. However, in recent years while rewatching TNG, I've appreciated Pulaski more than I did back then. Still, I find Crusher better and it actually pleases me that those iin charge had the grace to realize their mistake and bring her back. (I wish that they had did the same to a certain Voyager character too.)
As for Tasha Yar, I must admit that I never liked the Sela plot. It was silly.
As for season 2, it had a lot of good episodes too.
But it was in season 3 the series really took off and it was excellent all the way up to the end.
I guess the reason why seasons 1 and 2 seems "bad" to some people are because the following seasons are so incredibly good!
This just popped to mind. There was a lot of educating-the-audience exposition, where Data or someone would drone on and on about a topic in an unnatural manner. It had the vibe of a children's educational program where they lay it on way too thick.
Similar threads
