TNG’s 20th anniversary is coming… February 25, 2007
by Matt Wright , Filed under: TNG, Trek Franchise , trackback
As the 20th anniversary of The Next Generation approaches (on September 28) you’ll start to see more and more tidbits, information, and a general celebration of TNG around the web and here at TrekMovie.com.
To get an early start one of our intrepid community members Greg Mefford has put up an Entertainment Tonight clip of TNG’s announcement back in early 1987. It includes an interview with David Gerold as he writes a season one TNG episode.
Loading ...
Comments»
I love this show, my first and best Trek.
I was prepared and expected to hate TNG. It got my attention in the first episode and by the close of season three it became my favorite of all the versions. It still is. Happy anniversary to the magnificent seven.
I just wish that the previous two movies did better….
Also, if you want a replica of the Big D built go too
http://www.lightyearmodels.com
Sorry for the shameless plug.
David Gerrold in better times in the video. Didn’t last – -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gerrold
#2
Season 3 really marked TNG’s emergence. Michael Piller helped guide the show into more interesting territory, and by the time “The Best of Both Worlds” aired, TNG was off and running.
20 years… yikes. Time is truly the fire in which we burn!
I can’t believe it’s almost 20 years old. I can still remember it first coming onto TV. I had a conversation with my Dad saying I didn’t think it would be as good as the original. I must have been ten at the time because I’m 30 on the 27th of September. So it celebrates its 20th the day after my Birthday…very cool.
It did take me a while to warm to the new crew and having no Kirk or Spock around but after a couple of seasons I loved it and I still do. In fact it was watching TNG repeated years later on TV and video that helped get me through college.
I wander if they will remaster TNG some day. I remember thinking the space shots where amazing when I first saw them but even they are looking dated today.
But I would want them to get ahead of themselves. I rather they stick to the task of a top quality finish with the original series before they take on anything else :O)
I have to get this in before the Trek vs. Trek bashing begins… and that in itself is a pity.
I fully expect the anti-TNG trolls (I won’t name names) to roll in any moment and then this becomes the next battleground, like every other thread on here despite the subject.
I like all phases of Trek and believe all 5 shows have had their golden moments and awful episodes.
TOS was”past my bedtime” but I would sneak out to the living room to watch show. Balok at the end of credits scared me. But as I grew up,TOS became my after-school treat at 4pm. That secured it’s hold on my imagination. The desire to see more grew and grew. The movies helped but I wanted a weekly fix.
TNG was born.
I really thought that Picard was put in just to die early and Riker would assume command, but it didn’t happen that way. The first episodes struggled, but then things blossomed. Episodes became well written and well-acted. I hated the cliff-hanger season -finales, but only because they denied me the rest of the story until September.
I don’t believe TNG was developed to replace TOS, just to build on a solid foundation and tell good stories in the same universe many years later.
And now, watch the bashing begin, And remember, if you can’t say something nice, maybe you shouldn’t say anything at all.
Perhaps some might get the hint…. but I won’t hold my breath.
#8 Lt. Arex -
“like all phases of Trek and believe all 5 shows have had their golden moments and awful episodes.”
Agreed – -
appreciated, Greg
As a subject of the UK, I didn’t see TNG till about 1990, so I knew it mainly from comics, tie-in novels and a couple of VHS rentals at first.
TNG remains one of the great TV frustrations of my life. It see-sawed from week to week. It was a show that could turn out the thrills of Conspiracy one week and the mogadon that was The Last Outpost another.
Every time it seemed to be on the brink of breaking out and taking Trek in a new direction, it played it safe and hit the plot reset button.
To this day, I remember the thrill of watching The Best of Both Worlds I. To this day I remember the crushing letdown that was The Best of Both Worlds II.
TNG had the most potential of any Star Trek series, but, while mostly managing to be very very good, never quite attained greatness!
Twenty years! Sheesh! The TNG cast are as old as the TOS cast were now!! Marina Sirtis was definitely a fittie back then: the thinking man’s Erika Eleniak! ;)
What you describe is every TV show. It cannot be top notch all the time. What show do you think was perfect all the time?
#11 Dom,
I think you make an interesting point about TNG holding back from more daring directions. I think that if the show were produced today in this 24/Lost era of storytelling, you would see more risk-taking stories. I recall reading at some point that the producers considered killing Will Riker and replacing him with Tom Riker, resetting a stale character and making for a whole new dynamic onboard the Enterprise-D. I enjoyed TNG, it was a reliable source of entertainment for 7 years. I never fell in love with the show like TOS, but I am happy to celebrate it 20 years after the fact.
Hi Adam. Howzit going?
I agree. We have to accept TNG as a product of its time.
Now the TNG era’s kinda been wound up, it’d be a good thing to look back to when TNG was young and fresh, before the cynicism set in!
Happy Birthday Star Trek: The Next Generation!
I’m doing great, Dom, thanks for asking. How have you been?
You know, if those last two movies came out differently, I think the lingering memories of TNG would be more positive among the fans. Generations was a misstep for them as well, but First Contact was a strong recovery. But in total, I watch the TNG films the least, and some not at all. Even before it’s 7-year run ahd ended, it felt as if the show lost its inspiration. “All Good Things” was a good finale, but that episode was a shining light amidst some very forgettable final season episodes.
Adam,
Ron Moore has stated on a number of occasions that the TNG writing staff was well aware that the show had run out of gas while producing the final season. Luckily, they did manage to put together a finale which still stands as the best of all the Trek series. (TOS of course didn’t have one; DS9’s was half-great and half-crap; and the less said about the Enterprise and Voyager finales, the better.)
#13. Adam Cohen
“I enjoyed TNG, it was a reliable source of entertainment for 7 years. I never fell in love with the show like TOS, but I am happy to celebrate it 20 years after the fact.”
My sentiments exactly. All the incarnations of Trek were just that… entertainment. Some, arguably, more reliable than others.
One thing that is consistent in all of them… they were all products of their time and reflected the social consciousness, cultural tenor, visual styling, and story-telling triumphs and limitations of the their time.
A very happy and congratulatory score to TNG!
Hey Adam! Pretty hectic here. Not as busy as the pre-Christmas 24-hour work shift period, but work keeps me from posting much here in the daytime!
I think the naming of the final episode of season six of TNG (Descent) was, unfortunately, apt! I think, had TNG adopted the ensemble format fully, changing a lot more on-screen personnel and production crew, it might have lasted longer as a TV show. If TNG had finished at the end of season six and more time had been spent prepping the next film, it might have been better thought of now!
As a film franchise, TNG reflected its TV background. A messy first film, a solid second film that promised much, a third which played it annoyingly safe and a last film that was David Gerrold’s ‘One film too many!’
I wish All Good Things . . . had been a big screen movie, to be honest!
All Good Things was spectacular. I always thought a Q movie would have been great.
http://www.lightyearmodels.com
Paramount was trying to repackage STAR TREK — affiliates wanted more episodes. The plan was TOS would be sold to stations and run M-F, then TNG on the weekend. While I was working at a local independent, I can remember the Paramount rep pitching the show: TNG would round out 100 episodes for STAR TREK period. They just wanted to reach the magic 100 — there were no expectations that it would go on two or three years, much less seven.
This in from CBS ..20th Anniversary special ….. “Shades of Gray” remastered …
Whats that supposed to mean?
#22. Light Year Models
I’m just guessin’ but I suspect that #21. mooseday is funnin’ us a bit.
“Shades of Gray” was a crippled clip-show at the end of TNG’s second season chronicling Riker’s retrospect as he rails against a virus that has infected him.
The notion that this episode may be… “cough, cough”… remastered AND serve as the CBS 20th Anniversary special for the series is both hysterically funny and suicidally frightening.
However, mooseday, if your post was both in earnest from the standpoint of yours or CBS’s desire… I’m loading my revolver.
# 9, Agreed. I enjoyed all Trek series to a great extent, including the much maligned Enterprise.
TNG is and always will be my favorite Trek, even though I didn’t miss any of the other series. In the shows, the novels, and to a lesser extent, the movies, The character of Jean-Luc Picard has been more than a hero for me. Perhaps it was really Gene Roddenberry’s view of secular humanism shining through and making Picard’s character what he was, but without Patrick Stewart, the message may have have never been as adequately portrayed.
Besides the philosophical message and depictions of what society could be in the future, TNG didn’t forget to include some Science in their Fiction. There was also just enough action to satisfy many Sci-Fi fans….and its use had a subtlety that was sorely missing in other non-Trek (and later Trek) series. During its television run, it was rarely contrived or ‘gratuitous’. Unfortunately, that changed when TNG reached the big screen. I’m pleased to say that a great example of balanced action and story was “Tin Man”, written in part by Mr. Bailey.
I have to disagree that TNG is a product of its time. I do not recall the 1980s in America as a time that I would describe as welcoming to the optimism, scientific curiousity, and/or ideals portrayed in TNG. That’s why TNG was so special to me…it was unique. It was the exception to the rule (the later TNG movies, not-so-much). Today, TNG is even more ‘unique’. It is quite surreal when I watch reruns of TNG on SpikeTV, interspersed with commercial advertisments for Spike’s other ridiculous programming. Indeed, Star Trek is among the very few examples of television fiction I can stomach today.
Anyway, I’m glad to hear that Trek Movie will include references to TNG and its 20th Anniversary. I hope that what the person in post # 8 said does not come to pass, as it would be nice if TNG fans could feel TrekMovie.com was as much their site as it was anyone else’s.
They should’ve just made Phase II or whatever after The Voyage Home instead of bringing in a whole new cast and making it about the technology. TNG was a really good series overall, despite having a weak captain. The surrounding cast, dare I say, was superior to TOS. If Riker did succeed Picard, I think TNG could’ve surpassed TOS in many ways.
Ha. “Shades of Gray” sticks in my mind as the worst episode of anything .. ever. If only because I remember coming home from school, hyped for a new episode, making a special effort to get home before TNG started and then to find …. CHEESY CLIP SHOW. ARRRRGGGHHH
Even the TNG producers apologised for that episode … I believe the excuse was they had spent all there production budget and had to pad the season somehow ….
I remember wanting very much to like The Next Generation and watched it faithfully for several years until it just wore me out with its overall blandness. It had its moments. I know there are a lot of people out there who continue to like it, and for them this upcoming anniversary must be exciting.
Oh, and for the record, for that one low point of TNG ( and maybe Genesis ) .. there are MANY high points.
oh boy, 1987! Return of the Jedi, High School graduation for me, and the debut of Star Trek: The Next Generation! Truly, I hope this thread does stay civil and honorable. Whatever my ultimate feelings on TNG, it was an exciting debut and a sense of possibility! Happy 20th TNG! :-)
#26 mooseday – “Even the TNG producers apologised for that episode … I believe the excuse was they had spent all there production budget and had to pad the season somehow”
Don’t forget the largest reason which hurt the entire second season – Writer’s Strike!
TNG, the first Trek I watched, and my all time favorite.
#30 greg – after some research per memory alpha “This episode was written to save time and money as a result of the writers’ strike of 1988.”, I never knew it was the strike that screwed thing, thanks for point it out.
I do seem to remember an interview somewhere ( StarBurst maybe ) where they actually apolgised and promised they would never do a clip show again …
#24 Canonista, hello there, how you doin’?
LOL
We are up in the 30 post area now and I continue to pray that this is a positive thread that doesn’t sink to the levels of a few previous story threads.
I found TNG to be a breath of fresh air in that time. Much of TV was a wasteland of sitcoms and this had imagination. No show could be an Emmy-gem every week, but I feel this show tried hard to live up to it’s namesake, with similarities, but showing enough differences to not be called a clone. 20 years is a long time and this was a different crew in a different time, ours and theirs. Some may dislike it, but I don’t make a practice of mocking or trashing their favorites.
Wow TNG has it’s 20th anniversary coming up, I recall it premiering like it was yesterday.
Happy 20th Next Gen, I wonder if it will actually be celebrated? Or just sort of universally agreed upon that this year marks 20 years since Star Trek jumped the shark!
;)
You guys make it so eeeeeeasy.
I really wanted to like TNG. I remember when it premiered I worked at a TV station and got the early feed for the first episode. I got together with my Trek friends and we had a party and watched “Encounter and Farpoint”. We really didn’t know what to think and over the next 7years grew more and more dis-interested with the show. Aside from the words in the title, it was not anything like the Star Trek we were passionate about. We remained faithful and tuned in week after week and were occasionally rewarded with a “Yesterday’s Enterprise” or “Inner Light”, but ultimately we were, for the most part, dissappointed as these high points were the exception rather than the rule. That was the worst part,….aside from all the behind the scenes bickering and hiring and firing, the series the potential to be great “Star Trek”…but it rarely delivered. Clearly there was a type of fan, especially women, who thrived on this new-Coke style formula of Trek, but it wasn’t our little group of Trekkies. We wanted a show that demonstrated it knew how to walk that fine line of action/adventure/imagintion/ romance and humor that the orignal series balanced on so well. But it wasn’t to be. After 7 years we threw another party to celebrate the show’s demise. TNG was anything but a happy ride for this fan.
I think TNG is an interesting paradox in the annals of Star Trek history, on one hand, it’s success can be contributed to essentially being an indirect extension of TOS, in that much of the preliminary work for this series was done 10 years previously for Phase II, down to specific characterizations, (Data=Xon) etc, on the other hand, any particularly damning flaws inherent in the shows concept can also be traced back to the aborted Phase II series. I think TNG as advertised represents Roddenberrys retrospective self indulgent view on his own Star Trek. Unfortunately, that isn’t necessarily a good thing, as TNG and PHASE II were bourne out of a time in Roddenberrys life when he wasn’t all that interested in Star Trek again.
Star Trek = new imaginative personal and creative endeavor filled with passion and fire
TNG, Phase II, The Motion Picture in many ways = Been there, done that, I’d rather be doing something else but, ah well this is my baby so
Yep… just as predicted back in #8. The other side of the equation has arrived.
Josh, you are on record as liking TMP… you waffling now or is this just an exercise to get attention as always?
Read clearly what I said before you make assumptions.
which part?…
“it’s success can be contributed to essentially being an indirect extension of TOS”… which I have no problem with..
or…
this is just an exercise for you to get attention?
I’m reffering to the conceptual nature of TNG, and what the root of any percieved negative qualities may be attributed to since TNG is fairly divisive amongst fandom, with those that either adore it or don’t care much at all for it.
TNG unfortunately was brainstormed during a time in Roddenberrys life when he wasn’t that enthusiastic about Star Trek in general, as it was a past creative endeavor for him and he was too busy focusing on genesis II, the Questor Tapes, Andromeda , etc.
I’m not reffering to 1986 development but rather the core preliminary genesis of TNG during the mid 70’s when Star Trek was being rushed into production.
Riker = Decker
Illia = Troi
Xon= Data
Etc
Dude it seems to me YOU are the one that brings and calls attention to ME. Is every post made on these forums designed to bring attention to ones self according to your estimation? Let it drop. Discuss Star Trek, and STOP discussing me, lest I be inclined to to suspect there’s some serious Josh envy going on, which of course I wouldn’t blame you ;)
I only see them comming out with a HD-DVD/BluRay release.
It’s going to be interesting to see how they solve the video transfer/special effects issues for the HD release.
If Star Trek is taking this long, TNG would take 3 times as long.
#42 Josh,
Not you…. just your attitude towards others. Your previous comments calling me “Nazi” and the other terms you have endowed on others here just makes me wonder how you remain able to post on this site.
But you are right.. this IS a Star Trek board… and that makes it all ok.
#45 Lt. Arex
He’s right, Arex. Ignore him, not worth the trouble. Trek’s the subject.
How’d you get my name?
Wow. I still remember reading David Gerrold’s articles about how production on the yet-to-premiere series was going, and looking at those drawings of the Enteprise-D and the new bridge–I remember I thought the D was just too big and ungainly. And I remember watching the premiere and first two years of the show, always coming away with the feeling that the series just wasn’t quite cutting it. I kept watching though, only because there just wasn’t that much science fiction on tv, and it was nice to see a show with special effects (still pretty rare at the time),
And then that third year happened, and I’d come back week after week, thrilled and amazed by what I was seeing. And in the years that followed, the show just got bigger and better, becoming a pop cultural phenomenon in its own right. TNG stepped out from TOS’s shadow and found its own voice, alright, and dared to go places where TOS never would have gone. A captain who was forever scarred and changed after a brutal facing up to his own frailty. A richer, deeper Klingon culture than we’d have ever expected to see from those traditional villains. Storytelling that for its time, pushed back against the limits of tv mediocrity (this was way before serious shows like The Sopranos and The West Wing lifted up the medium as a whole, remember). TNG came along at the perfect time to spark my imagination in a big way, and for that I’ll always be grateful, because it opened my eyes to what could be accomplished if you dared to think big and beyond the conventional.
So happy 20th anniversary, TNG. You performed one of the greatest comebacks ever, and you’ll always have a place in this fanboy’s heart. I’m glad I was there for the entire ride.
Xai, leave me alone. I didn’t take your name
I have fond memories of TNG. When it first appeared, I wasn’t all that impressed. But as time went on, and the characters became more developed and more attractive. The early TNG episodes show a group of actors… By the time they got to “Best of Both Worlds,” they had become those characters…
TNG had all the stuff I think Roddenberry wanted, but took David Gerrold to put it in focus. There were some truly great episodes. There were some clunkers, just like TOS had… The bottom line is that when Star Trek was at its best, it was UNBEATABLE.
#48 Sleeper Agent X
Yet another comment confirming the wideheld belief that the 3rd Season marked the real beginning of TNG’s strength. Josh, you’ve mentioned how a lot of Phase II development was later transferred to TNG, and that’s true, but I think the first two seasons of TNG (which relied on that Phase II material) suffered from that dependence. When Michael Piller came in and took over that writing staff (and Gene Roddenberry took a backseat from rigors of the day-to-day production) the show improved dramatically.
TNG, just like TOS prove a pattern- Gene Roddenberry was an extremely gifted conceptualist- he was able to create characters, themes and the glue needed to make for a durable show. However, his skills as a nitty-gritty writer were lacking. Similar to George Lucas, Roddenberry was able to articualte the big picture elements, but he lacked the craftmanship to create dramatically compelling dialogue and tension-filled storytelling. When other writers took the reigns from Gene, TNG became vibrant and fresh.
TNG introduced possibly most feared Trek enemy in the Borg. A hive culture, not to be reasoned with. The ultimate enemy… faceless, no malice, just unrelenting intent to take you and make you part of them.
X
excellent point Adam C
#51
I agree that 3rd Season TNG and forward contained most of the best stories and definitely the best on-screen execution. The actors were settled into their roles and everything came together.
But there were a few 1st and 2nd season eps that were good, including the pilot. The 2nd Season suffered because of the strike.
#54 Canonista
You’re right, I forgot about the 1988 writers’ strike, excellent point. I defintiely don’t think the first 2 seasons of TNG were awful, I do enjoy some of the stories from those years, but there’s a strong improvement from the 3rd season on- the shows had more sizzle when Piller took over.
Ah, TNG. It came out when I was five – I don’t remember watching the show very well then, but I remember loving the sliding doors at the mall that reminded me of the Enterprise…
#51
Adam
It’s a strange dichotomy in terms of Rod n’ berries involvement with Star Trek, everyones favorite TOS season seems to be 1, of which he was the most involved, and everyones least favorite season of TNG was season 1, of which he was again most involved.
#45
Mr Orange guy with three arms and legs
Well, it’s a very curious conundrum , essentially I’m able to continue to post on this site because there is a field below entitled “message”, and I primarily highlight the field on any given occasion then use the keyboard to type out a particular message. Once that is completed I use my mouse and select an option below the message field which says “say it.”
Once concluded, I highlight the field which says “name” and insert my user handle of choice which happens to be “Josh T. (some Trek reference beginning with T) Kirk Esquire’ , which is an obvious play on the name of the Captain of the Starship Enterprise, since my name is infact Joshua Shane Vance, not James T. Kirk. Anyway, I follow that detail by highlighting the “E-mail” field and again inserting my particular E-mail.
So in essence, I could be mistaken but, I believe that is how I’m able to post messages on this forum. Is it different for you?
TNG is my favorite series and the Trek i grew up with
yeah i’m a fan of TNG and it was quite an accomplishment. Its great to see people excited about celebrating it. and you guys who hate TNG bashers I’m gonna give you a break because I hated Voyager for taking the Borg and turning them into regular ol bad guys who could be beaten every week. I still remember seeing their first episode and then crying because they turned Picard into one, they scared the crap outta me. You guys in charge good job of including all aspects of Trek on this site and thank you for giving me something to do other than check my myspace every day
re: #11
Whether one thinks of it as “very, very good,” or, “great,” TNG was as good as there ever has been on TV. So, this is really more of a material world vs. ideal world assessment. And, that’s fine. It’s good to have high standards, and, always think that something better is out there waiting to be done.
But, as corny as it sounds, TNG was an integral part of my life. It opened my mind, and freed my spirit during my formative years (I was 13 at the start of the series.) For seven years, I got dramatic treatments of cerebral, Scientific concepts, weighty Philosophical debates, ellusive moral predicaments all mixed with some very funny comic relief, sprinklings of Shakespeare and other classic Literature, and, artistic, crafty acting, most notably by Stewart and Spiner.
My high school Lit. teacher would actually reference the show, and, even taped an episode, “The First Duty,” to show us in class, to illustrate a theme from a piece of Lit. we were studying. TNG actually tought me some of the most valuable life lessons, believe it or not. And, it had broad appeal. That’s the sign of a classic work – when the masses, as well as the fans, love it.
TNG was a magical period, not just for me, but for Trek, and for the Sci-Fi genre. Just look at how the genre exploded with shows on the heels of TNG’s final days. It’s a shame that the TNG movies were a bust (Though FC was enjoyable, and, had its moments, it showed the early symptoms of what would eventually doom the TNG movie franchise), but the TNG TV series is destined to be as classic, if not moreso, as TOS.
As far as the TNG seasons go, the Season 1 was rough, for me. There were too many cringe-inducing moments, especially during the first half of the season. But, Season 2 was markedly better, with episodes that I love to watch over and over, like “Time Squared,” “The Measure of a Man,” and, “Samaritan Snare.” Pakled leader, Reginod, still gets a chuckle out of me, as do the crew’s reactions to the mentally deficient species. Constrastingly, I don’t ever desire to watch episodes from Season 1.
By Season 3, the Series was in full swing, and, we were in for a fantastic ride for the next 5 years. But, I’d love to talk about specific episodes. That kind of attention to detail is what I seek in forums like this, after all.
Yes, wow 20 years. It just doesn’t seem that long. Though in way we have that same feeling again with waiting on news about XI. Atleast now we have the net as a source for up to date information rather than having to get snippets form ET or the Today show.
Being an old time Trek fan I’ve never been one for comparing series, I supose I’m part of that rare breed that likes all Trek series. None were perfect but as stated earlier what TV series is. But I suppose I’d rate Next Gen and TOS as equal favorites. TOS because I grew up with it and Next Gen because It brought new life to Trek.
LLAP
Hi Cygnus-X1.
Interesting views. TOS had similar meaning for me, although the sex and violence gave it an extra human kick!
Is TNG ‘classic’ television?
I don’t know. It’s a little too early to tell its lasting worth. TOS has been about for forty years and is successful enough that it’s back on our screens in HD, with HD FX. The new movie is going to be about TOS, because it is so iconic that they reckon it can exist beyond its original actors. And TOS is endlessly referenced by the likes of South Park!
TNG has been about for 20 years. At the moment it’s going through a tough patch. The films have soured people’s memories of it and, given the lack of sex and violence, the remaining jaw-jaw seems terribly naive and stolid. TNG’s mid-80s therapy-speak background is screamingly obvious.
TOS gave me a sense of wanderlust, a sense of adventure and mixed that in with intriguing moral debates. I felt TOS was a discussion put on screen as part of an adventure. TNG, I felt, dictated how I should live.
TNG, for me, represents humans on the path to extinction. They live sterile, politically correct lives, lacking in passion, obsessed with a prime directive they are willing to use, even if it means allowing an intelligent race to die on an exploding planet. They represent humans who have become so de-humanised that they set themselves above the gods!
That an unemotional android is the most emotional character, other than the flaky half-alien Troi, says a lot. The worrying thing in TNG is that there are no human rebels, anarchists, artists, poets or whatever. Humans are like machines. Where did the Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and so on go?
Their absence implies a Soviet-style policy of mass-suppression and mass-extermination. When humans look to literature or visit the holodeck, it’s never modern literature they encounter. Indeed, Jake Sisko is the only obvious major character with artistic leanings in all of Trekdom! And the other oddball, Barclay, is patronised like some freak of nature! When you meet Maquis characters, they seem more like old school Starfleet.
TNG is an interesting expansion of Trek, but, ultimately, it and its spin-offs’ view of the future leaves disturbing questions unanswered!
TOS Trek RULES!
It’s my experience that whichever version of Trek you were introduced to first, is the one you like best. It’s not an absolute, just a general observation based on 41 years in Trek fandom.
#56
“Ah, TNG. It came out when I was five – I don’t remember watching the show very well then, but I remember loving the sliding doors at the mall that reminded me of the Enterprise…”
I’m feeling really old, right now. I’d been out of college for nearly five years when it premiered (remember thinking — “and how many ports/windows are on that bloody ship!?), and it’s been 32 years (approx.) since the first ‘con’ that I attended (while I was attending the H.S. overlooking Planet Deneva…LOL): Equicon at the LAX Marriot.
#63-
YOU GOT IT!
For me also though, DS9 was by far the best written and acted Trek.
This was largely due to the fact that all the best writers were pulled off TNG and put on DS9 when it got up and running. Thank God!
IMHO, the involvement of Jeri Taylor and Brannon Braga signaled the downslide of TNG. No surprise that when these same left-over production teams when on to produce VOY and ENT, they both sucked. On the other side of the coin, guys like Ron Moore went on to develop shows like Galactica. Need I say more?
Season 3 is the only TNG dvd set I actually purchased, the best, I believe.
(Thank you, Michael Piller, for keeping Berman in check.)
#66 You are need to give credit to Ira Steven Behr. He made DS9 its own unique show.
Thing is, did DS9 really need to be Star Trek: Deep Space Nine? Could it have survived without the Star Trek name?
Okay, like TNG, it picked up after a couple of seasons, but the modern Trek series became a by-word for studio indulgence. While other shows would be cancelled after five episodes for being dull, Star Trek shows could wait 66 episodes before they got half-reasonable.
In a sense, Trek became a cancer where SF TV shows were concerned: other shows would have to fight for survival, but the latest Trek offering could steamroller over them even when it wasn’t very good.
As a result, how many people felt a sense of ‘Ding Dong, the Witch is Dead’ when the plug was pulled on Enterprise?!
For me TNG is the best Star Trek series. I also thought that it could only be a rip-off of TOS, Data just another version of Spock and so on, but I was wrong. Actually TNG influenced my life. The crew became some kind of inspiring family and I was very sad when everyone bashed the TNG movies (espacially Nemesis). Maybe the expectation where to high and there was to much nitpicking.
Even when I watch (most of the time by accident) some of the episodes today I’m positivley surprised about the quality of the series. They had something to say and they said it. None of the big SciFi series produced today does this (e.g. Stargate).
Thank you for that TNG or as Q put it:
“For that one fraction of a second, you were open to options you had never considered. That is the exploration that awaits you… not mapping stars and studying nebula… but charting the unknown possibilities of existence. “
#68 Dom
Economically speaking, TNG and DS9 were doing their own thing in the wild west of syndicated television. The major broadcast networks had nothing to do with those shows, so their economic impact on television at large can be deemed “insulated.”
There were sci-fi oriented shows that did pop up on the big networks- namely The X-Files, Space Rangers (remember that show?), Space: Above and Beyond and Millennium. Sci-fi shows in general are expensive to produce, and at the time many networks were reluctant to spend $1 million per episode on the genre. It seems like syndication was the best bet, as Star Trek proved. When Star Trek popped up on the network UPN (VOY and Enterprise) they had to deal with a different set of expectations and pressures. Their numbers dropped off due to “Star Trek” fatigue and a watered-down product. Demand and quality diminished, to say the least. I think that Star Trek became like other sci-fi shows when they were on a broadcast network- they were an expensive burden that television execs disliked.
Now, I was all for Star Trek taking a long break from TV around the time Voyager was airing, and I also thought Berman and Co. needed to leave the franchise. But Star Trek, at its heart, is a television show. This new movie may refresh the product, but Star Trek needs to be a weekly product, an episodic presence that fans can consume more regularly than the periodic motion picture. That’s why I’m reluctant to compare Trek to other long-running franchises like Batman or James Bond- those products mostly exist as movies (Batman had its animated incarnation and of course that campy 60s show, but that pales in comparison to Trek). So eventually, Trek needs a new television show, something of QUALITY of course, but until that happens, the franchise is still dormant. Look at how the weekly remastered episodes have re-energized fan interest? And that’s with stories we all know inside-out! If there were no remastered episodes, fan activity would be pretty low, even with the new movie on its way. Even though this site is called “Trek Movie Report” the bulk of the articles and reader participation is on TOS-R. Imagine if a new show were being broadcast as well.
#29,Jedi came out in ‘83.
Hi Adam.
Hopefully all the development work that’s gone into the new movie can be put into a weekly series with Abrams and Lindelof, perhaps, as Exec Producers.
I’d love to see a new show set in the 23rd Century.
I loved TNG. I didn’t think it got going properly until riker got his beard then the episode picked up and still hold up today.
“Yesterday’s Enterprise” remains my favorite episode of TNG of all time, just fantastic. Other greats like “Best of Both Worlds”,”Tapestry”, “Sin of the father”, “Redemption, “Unification” are all classics in there own right.
Just brilliant TNG was just special. TV misses it alot… unless you have Sky One
Hi Craig. Agreed about Yesterday’s Enterprise. The trouble with TNG is that, unlike TOS, the parallel/alternate universes were far more interesting than the regular one!
Best of Both Worlds 1 was a joy to behold. Best of Both Worlds 2 was a colossal letdown. I mean, how can you come back from that cliffhanger and give us a boring countdown followed by a pansy-ass tinsel beam?!! And how come, after the end of the human race was spelled out in part one, everything was ok in part two.
Tapestry was the best Q episode and one of the best Picard episodes: inspiring to watch. Redemption was fun, although I considered Unification a massive missed opportunity.
I think the problem I had with TNG is that I started watching it in 1990, because UK licencing issues kept it off-screen until then. By 1990, I had become addicted to a series that would lead me to seek out a career in the media: Twin Peaks.
For all the criticisms that can be aimed at it, TP blew the TV industry wide open. It paved the way for The X Files, Lost, Buffy and most modern serial sci-fi and fantasy dramas. A consequence of that was that TNG seemed mind-numbingly pedestrian at times.
I mean, you have monster insects taking over the Federation in Conspiracy, who are never followed up on, because they decided turn them into the Borg. What devastation had they wrought? I mean, major Federation citizens died. Starships were blown up! Yet the series continued as if it had never happened!
Then Best of Both Worlds 2 wiped out half of Starfleet and after one episode where Jean-Luc blubs in a California vineyard masquerading as France, Wolf 351 isn’t mentioned again until The Drumhead. It took DS9 to put a human face on that battle and First Contact to deal with Picard’s real reaction to the Borg’s rape of his mind and body!
The continual plot resetting demonstrated a terrible lack of ambition. TV changed in the era that TNG was on air. And like it of not, by season seven, it had been left behind! With TNG in its later days, it could be forgivable. Unfortunately, later Treks never caught up either. By the time we got to Enterprise, Trek was in a timewarp, making 80s Star Trek 20 years too late!
I’m still of the opinion the only reason Voyager and Enterprise failed to get a larger audience is because they were shown on UPN. It would have been interesting to see how Ent would have done if it was shown on syndication instead. I believe Trek could still be on air and doing good figures but it needs to be on syndication.
Perhaps if XI does well enough it will generate a new series [which depending on wether CBS is still owned by Paramount at the time] will proberly be shown on CBS. Something I’m not crazy about given Treks treatment by NBC and UPN.
LLAP
Enterprise and Voyager failed to find an audience because they were badly written and stylistically the SAME, with an overabundance of irritating characters. (NOT the fault of the actors.) It was oversaturation of a product that was catering to the lowest common intellectual denominator.
I’ll welcome whatever Abrams has to offer with open arms by comparison.
And #67 Adam- Of course that goes without saying- Ira Behr was the most brilliant creative force behind any Trek so far.
Long live DS9.
I agree with # 70. Trek is a television phenomenon. I think Paramount’s financial expectations are a bit grandiose, which may or may not be to the detriment of the next film. We’ll see.
Also, one or more of the Trek series may or may not have failed to exceed Paramount’s expectation of “Internal Rate of Return”, but art does not ‘fail’. You either like it or you don’t. Its subjective.
Unfortunately. Canonista, dollar signs aren’t subjective. It would be nice if ST could be art, but it isn’t: Star Trek is a business.
The next film needs to push the right buttons to get asses on seats, otherwise it’s a failure, no matter how pretty it looks!
Naked green Orion slave girls might help, of course! ;)
#70, I remember Space Rangers,(CBS,1993)pretty awful,but it had a kick ass Hans Zimmer theme-don’t know if he scored the series episodes,too.
I’m trying to separate the notion that a financial failure means something is somehow inferior.
Paramount may see Star Trek as a business, but the average fan doesn’t have to. They may appreciate that business decisions perpetuate Star Trek’s existence, but that is not the same as appreciating something as an artform. Acting, writing, and cinematography is the artform that I am referring to.
I liked all the seasons of TNG myself although I did find it getting blander as it went along.
# 69 – “For me TNG is the best Star Trek series. I also thought that it could only be a rip-off of TOS, Data just another version of Spock and so on, but I was wrong.”
This reminds me of the Kirk vs. Picard lists. In one of them (probably 90% of you have already seen this):
Listen carefully… Picard’s crew had: A guy with a body part that looked different from everyone else (Geordi); A first officer that gives the captain advice (Riker); A pale, unemotional, intellectual science officer that said “intriguing” (Data); A half-human, half-alien that can read minds (Troi); And an alien of above-average strength that was not in his normal element (Worf). Kirk had ALL of these in one person: SPOCK! Picard’s entire crew is a rip-off of ONE guy in Kirk’s crew!! Wake up and smell the coffee, children!
82 – Yeah, you’re probably one of those people who claim the original Star Wars is nothing but a rip-off of Flash Gordon and Kuroswawa, too.
YOU wake up and smell the coffee, kiddo–if you try hard enough, you can claim any great work is a ripoff of some other work. But really, you’re just grasping at straws, with no true appreciation for the creativity and substance behind the material.
Wasn’t Gerrold basically co-creator of TNG? Wish he had stayed.
84. He was. Read his Encounter at Farpoint novelisation to see how much they blanded things down for TV!
re: #62, Dom,
>>I felt TOS was a discussion put on screen as part of an adventure. TNG, I felt, dictated how I should live.>TNG, for me, represents humans on the path to extinction. They live sterile, politically correct lives, lacking in passion, obsessed with a prime directive they are willing to use, even if it means allowing an intelligent race to die on an exploding planet. They represent humans who have become so de-humanised that they set themselves above the gods.>The worrying thing in TNG is that there are no human rebels, anarchists, artists, poets or whatever. Humans are like machines. Where did the Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and so on go?>Their absence implies a Soviet-style policy of mass-suppression and mass-extermination. When humans look to literature or visit the holodeck, it’s never modern literature they encounter. Indeed, Jake Sisko is the only obvious major character with artistic leanings in all of Trekdom! And the other oddball, Barclay, is patronised like some freak of nature! When you meet Maquis characters, they seem more like old school Starfleet.>TNG is an interesting expansion of Trek, but, ultimately, it and its spin-offs’ view of the future leaves disturbing questions unanswered!
[I don't know what just happened with #86, but it's totally messed up. I'll try again.]
“I felt TOS was a discussion put on screen as part of an adventure. TNG, I felt, dictated how I should live. ”
I love TOS as well, and, won’t debate which is the better show. But, I concur with your finding of TNG as heavy-handed, at times.
“TNG, for me, represents humans on the path to extinction. They live sterile, politically correct lives, lacking in passion, obsessed with a prime directive they are willing to use, even if it means allowing an intelligent race to die on an exploding planet. They represent humans who have become so de-humanised that they set themselves above the gods. ”
Well, the Prime Directive issue was one of the debates that they treated throughout the course of the series. They DID have passions, though. Riker was the favorite character to use for sexual/romantic themes. They even had him fall in love with an androgenous individual from another species, so that they could treat the theme of sexual identity.
Picard’s romances were more tame than Kirk’s, I’ll grant you. But, his other passions were also treated – archaeology, for example. The stated raison d’etre, in TNG, was exploration and self-improvement. Perhaps that’s unrealistic, or uninspiring to you, personally, but it is a bold proposition to make. How many other shows can you think of that have actually come out with an unequivocal statement of the meaning of life?
“The worrying thing in TNG is that there are no human rebels, anarchists, artists, poets or whatever. Humans are like machines. Where did the Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Hindus and so on go?”
You need to go back and watch the series again from start to finish. These were all treated. Off the top of my head, there was “The Outrageous Okona,” the rebelious, rogue pilot fleeing a marital conundrum; there was that episode with James Cromwell, with the Green Beret-type guy, who excaped his planetary prison, where all such types were relocated after their military service, for the safety of the population at large; there was Worf’s brother, Nikolai, who became the leader of a primative tribe after empregnating one of its women, who then tricked the Enterprise into helping him save their culture; and, so on.
As for religion, the Enterprise crew were largely secular. But, the religions of other species were treated. Worf was regularly seen practicing his Klingon religion, which bears some resemblence to that of the Vikings. Picard was even seen as a deity by a primative culture, in one episode.
“Their absence implies a Soviet-style policy of mass-suppression and mass-extermination. When humans look to literature or visit the holodeck, it’s never modern literature they encounter. Indeed, Jake Sisko is the only obvious major character with artistic leanings in all of Trekdom! And the other oddball, Barclay, is patronised like some freak of nature! When you meet Maquis characters, they seem more like old school Starfleet.”
You’re on your own with the Soviet analogy. And, though, you’re conflating series – I’m only talking about TNG, and Jake Sisko was from DS-9 – the crew were CONSTANTLY working on their art: Data on his painting, violin playing and acting; Riker with his trombone; and, they all took parts in plays. If they’d referenced 24th Century literature, apart from the writers having to invent it first, we, the viewers, wouldn’t have been able to appreciate the allusions. And, in fact, they did reference Klingon and other non-human literature from time to time, though we don’t know the years of publication of those works.
“TNG is an interesting expansion of Trek, but, ultimately, it and its spin-offs’ view of the future leaves disturbing questions unanswered!”
But, I thought you prefered having the questions unanswered. You just said that you prefered the sense of adventure in the way that TOS treated issues, and, that you didn’t like TNG telling you “how to live.”
““Their absence implies a Soviet-style policy of mass-suppression and mass-extermination.”
Those of you that felt slighted and insulted by the values projected in the writing of the stories of TNG are probably the ones that are usually on the giving end of the insults in real life.
‘Those of you that felt slighted and insulted by the values projected in the writing of the stories of TNG are probably the ones that are usually on the giving end of the insults in real life.’
Sod off, you self-righteous bastard! ;)
Same back at ya, Dom…
;)
# 83 – Don’t get your panties in a bunch. It’s called humor. Are you familiar with the concept?
#91 – Bite my shiny metal ass! (that humorous enough for ya? ;))
Great post Cygnus. Hmm… no rebuttals either
Lets hate Paramountd,
Some of us have a job (not to mention I’ve just got back from a very pleasant night at the cinema with a very sexy girl!) which means replying to a post that length can take time and I’m not really in the mood right now! Plus I’m off on vacation in a couple of days, which means I’m not on these boards as much as usual.
Just because a reply isn’t immediate doesn’t mean one isn’t forthcoming. I don’t believe in that playground horseshit that if you don’t get an instant reply to a point, you’ve ‘won’ a debate. This is a ***discussion*** forum, not a competition!
Thank you for your reply, Cygnus. Good points. I’ll get back to you when I can. :)
Sorry Mr. Dom….. Deluise is it?
TNG is much Crappier tan the already dreaded Star Wars, a shotty show designned to promote computer geeks’ struggle. The TNG Flicks are vasty worse than the entire Star Wars Saga. TOS TV show and six films were excellant, TNG is trash! The latest TNG flick, Nemesis Plagiarized upon The Wrath of Khan and The Search for Spock! I expect that tehre be no more TNG flicks after Nemesis, for the three prior TNG films were rewritten TNG episodes. Generations angered a lot of fans by having Kirk killed, whjich I found out earlier this year. On my Birthday, the TNG Flick Generator is getting demolished! Picard is also known as CAPTAIN BIGMOUTH for he talks way too much! I hope that the Enterprise-E is blasted by a mysterious alien vessel while the alien ship is cloaked! Picard is a Pompass Jerk who wants too bore people with his flappy trap! Picard teaches you how too do FORCE ARGUMENTS (Ad Baculums) to intimidate, to threaten people who disagree with you!
TNG remains the best Trek series-EVER.
Even those 4 uninspired(although not as bad as Trek V) TNG flicks don’t take away from it.
The fact that 3-yes, 3- spinoffs came from it proves its greatness(although only the 1st-DS9-proved to be any good).