Would TNG have been appreciated in the sixties ?

[at Quark's]

I often hear remarks about shows like TOS (TNG) how it's a great show, but "of course you can see it was made in the sixties (eighties)" I'm not only talking about primitive technical effects but also about typical story elements (such as situations with the Klingons that mirror the cold war and how they later became friends, or in the case of TNG, a psychologist on the bridge), or perhaps even the way these stories are told.

So let's suppose the reverse, and say that a time traveler found a way to slip the TNG tapes (or another follow up show) to the TV company and convince them to show this instead of TOS. Would that show have been appreciated back then? What would people say about it? Or wouldn't it simply have caught on because it was 'too far removed'? (This is of course ignoring the elements that only could have been understood by first watching TOS, which I suppose, are few).

 

[VulcanMindBlown]

They would probably have to tone down the language, because they were more conservative back then. Some of their shows were rated TV-14, so they would have to downsize the violence and maybe the thematic themes.

 

[uniderth]

I'm surprised at how graphic those first few disintegration are in TNG.

 

[A Chimpanzee & 2 Trainees]

Well my first thought is that the show would die a rather quick death, only to be later appreciated (if it's not forgotten) for being "ahead of its time" by a very small cult following.

Writing, acting, direction, and set design were so different between the 60's and the 80's. I just can't see a general audience that loves to watch Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost In Space, or TOS being ready to accept a more ponderous show like TNG.

A lot of people today may make light of TOS as being so "60's" but that criticism is in part because we have a notion of what "the 60's" are for pop culture. Show somebody in 1967 a show made in 1987 and they'll probably be blown away by the technical quality of it, but walk away scratching their head, wondering why anyone would want to waste that much money on an episode with such an odd story and characters.

That's just my first thoughts, but ultimately, meh...I dunno

 

[The Wormhole]

I'm surprised at how graphic those first few disintegration are in TNG.

Riva's "Choir" being disintegrated is really freaky. Skeletons, man.

 

[2takesfrakes]

TOS' ratings during its initial airing kept hovering at the margin just above barely acceptable ratings. It is my considered opinion that TNG is what audiences, then, were really craving and hankering for ... what a shame they would not be getting it.

 

[dahj]

What would people say about it?

"A woman doctor? What madness is this?"

Writing, acting, direction, and set design were so different between the 60's and the 80's. I just can't see a general audience that loves to watch Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, Lost In Space, or TOS being ready to accept a more ponderous show like TNG.

Season 1 of TNG was not that far off from TOS stylistically speaking, I don't think it would have come as that much of a shock.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

I doubt it. I think TNG would have seemed a bit too slow and talky for the mid-60s audience.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Is this assuming that the show was made with '60s tech? Otherwise, the effects and alone would have blown audiences away in the '60s.

 

[Tracy Trek]

Although TNG only showed a man in a mini-skirt once, possibly twice, in the first season. I have to wonder what a 60's audience would think of that.

 

[Push The Button]

You would have to strip the budgets of every other Desilu production at the time to come up with enough cash to make each TNG episode. Assuming the technical requirements could have been met in 1966 Hollywood, a lot had changed between 66 and 87. I'm not sure how a French captain with an English accent would have been received by American audiences at the time.

 

[WB2]

I think people would expect more hand to hand action in the 60s

 

[The Wormhole]

Although TNG only showed a man in a mini-skirt once, possibly twice, in the first season. I have to wonder what a 60's audience would think of that.

Actually, he showed up quite frequently throughout the first season.
EDIT: Okay, just consulted Memory Alpha, he was seen five times.

 

[at Quark's]

Is this assuming that the show was made with '60s tech? Otherwise, the effects and alone would have blown audiences away in the '60s.

I was initially assuming the finished tapes shipped back in time. So no 60's tech, no production costs.

However, if you think it would 'blow away audiences' to such an extent they wouldn't really notice the other elements of the show anymore (such as the ideas, the themes, and the storytelling), perhaps we'd better assume it was made using 60's tech.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Although TNG only showed a man in a mini-skirt once, possibly twice, in the first season. I have to wonder what a 60's audience would think of that.

Not this guy (who appears once apparently)? http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/...division_personnel#Lieutenant_j.g._.282364.29 I imagine he wears it much as some races wear togas or robes. Not with any inherent male or female bias but simply as a variant of uniform.

 

[velour]

I don't think TNG would stand a chance with a 60s tv audience.

I wasn't around in the 60s. But I assume TOS, "Batman", and "Lost in Space" were good representatives of the style of a 60s show. The acting and story telling styles and atmospherics of TNG were so different from those shows. TNG would have been an awful fit for 60s tv, imo.

Those 60s show were hammy and colorful. TNG was so subdued, technocratic, and stiff. Picard was the stiff upper lip aristocratic Englishman. Geordi was a boring stiff compared to the hard drinking colorful Scotty. The TNG characters would not have endeared themselves to a 60s audience, I don't think.

 

[Worf359]

I think a 60's audience would have been amazed by the show. I mean compared to TOS, this looks like the real thing.

 

[The Old Mixer]

I wasn't around in the 60s. But I assume TOS, "Batman", and "Lost in Space" were good representatives of the style of a 60s show. The acting and story telling styles and atmospherics of TNG were so different from those shows. TNG would have been an awful fit for 60s tv, imo.

OTOH, you had grounded semi-anthology dramas like Naked City, Route 66, and Wagon Train...though that may not be what audiences were looking for in sci-fi at the time.

 

[RAMA]

They would have been mesmerized by the special FX and shocked at how radical it was compared to 60s shows.

RAMA

I often hear remarks about shows like TOS (TNG) how it's a great show, but "of course you can see it was made in the sixties (eighties)" I'm not only talking about primitive technical effects but also about typical story elements (such as situations with the Klingons that mirror the cold war and how they later became friends, or in the case of TNG, a psychologist on the bridge), or perhaps even the way these stories are told.

So let's suppose the reverse, and say that a time traveler found a way to slip the TNG tapes (or another follow up show) to the TV company and convince them to show this instead of TOS. Would that show have been appreciated back then? What would people say about it? Or wouldn't it simply have caught on because it was 'too far removed'? (This is of course ignoring the elements that only could have been understood by first watching TOS, which I suppose, are few).

 

[Tenacity]

Although TNG only showed a man in a mini-skirt once, possibly twice, in the first season.

TOS had Apollo is a fairly short skirt.