Comments on: TNG@20 – ET Visits TNG

By: idreamedmusic

idreamedmusic — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 19:43:36 +0000

Thanks for this. My, so long ago.

But wow – ET hasn’t changed a bit in 20 years!

By: J_schinderlin56

J_schinderlin56 — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:52:26 +0000

After John Tesh Gave this report he listed the top ten things you should never say while on a date with a Klingon, then talked about the 5 differant things a Vulcan can do to Improve his love life, followed by 6 tips for the android who wants to act more human.

By: IrishTrekkie

IrishTrekkie — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 13:32:38 +0000

warp into hyberspace ? hmm lol fair enough. and this shows looks muck , i dont think it will last , not sure what they guy was talking about 5 or 6 year mission , they will be lucky to get a one year one . viewers will never like this , its going to fail badly . hahahahaha.. but really i was only 1 when TNG started , so there has always been star trek for me to watch , but when enterprise finished and they said there was no new movie , i started to panic , i cant go cold turkey , thank god they are making a new movie , i know it going to rock . and heres to many more years of star trek i mean think about it , star trek will be 50 soon enough , and i am sure one day it will make it to 100 with hopefully new trek tv show or movies being made 60 years in the future. ( that would be so cool)

By: Storma

Storma — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 10:58:45 +0000

TNG is so much better than TOS. The characters are more evolved, the show is PERFECT TREK. Gene Roddenberry told it himself!

By: freezejeans

freezejeans — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 04:15:20 +0000

hahaha that’s awesome, I remember seeing that during my sophomore year in college and nearly wetting myself in anticipation after growing up on the original series during 70’s syndication. I can’t believe it’s been 20 years already! Remember the 1986 anniversary of TOS, with Shatner on SNL? Crikey. I think our current technological rate has somehow quickened our perception of time, 20 years has whizzed by.

With the eminent new movie, it’s almost like 1987 all over again. Crazy.

By: OR Coast Trekkie

OR Coast Trekkie — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 22:07:17 +0000

#7 Well said. The fact that ILM did the effects for Trek in fact, shows they are now NOT competitors. And, wihtout Star Trek there would be no Star Wars. So really, Star Wars owes its existence to Star Trek.

#12 Wow, someone in here younger than me (I was 6 then, and super pumped)

I actually liked the effect of having the font letters start out hollow and then being filled in. A good 80’s computer effect.

#32 I agree with you. Some of the best DS9 episodes were the ones that really showed that, in fact, Starfleet is as much the military/defense for the Federation as it was scientific and exploration.

I happen to think that in another 4-5 years, we’ll be ready for a new Star Trek show. Some people say a 23rd century show. However, why not go further into the future, like say the 25th century. A new Enterprise (I-J), new crew, boldy going where no one has gone before. Where has the Federation come since the Dominion War? How far have the Ferengi come since Rom because Nagus? Perhaps the Breen be the new enemy? I’m just saying…

Now, back to ILM… If the suits at CBS-D/Paramount had contracted ILM to do the TOS Remastered project, instead of doing it in house, I’m sure EVERYONE would LOVE it. Probably would have been cool enough to truly generate new excitement over TOS.

By: SNAKE

SNAKE — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 17:49:19 +0000

i still cant get my head around it being 20 YEARS since TNG began!!

its crazy – some of my friends and family still refer to it as the ‘new star trek’ !!

Still in a way maybe they are right – TNG never really ended as it continued with the TNG movies up until only recently – plus DS9/Voyager and Ent can be seen as spin offs of TNG ( coming out like a conveyour belt – one leading after the other – even when the previous one was still on the air )..where as TNG was the proper sequel to TOS coming nearly 20 years after the last ep…

I guess that was you’ve got it like this:

1st incarnation – TOS
2nd incarnation – TOS movies
3rd incarnation – TNG plus movies/DS9/Voy/Ent

4th incarnation – The new Abrams movie…

By: Etha Williams

Etha Williams — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 11:21:36 +0000

#33 — Couldn’t have said it better myself.

By: Fireoftime

Fireoftime — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 06:44:35 +0000

“you cannot write drama for “perfect” characters. What made TNG so great, and DS9 even better, was to show that the fundamental issues inherent to the human condition —”life, death, love, the things “worth the agony and the sweat,” to quote Faulkner — were still real issues even after an age of techonological and economic progress.”
-Santiago – September 2, 2007

Yes, but all those thing, “life, death, love, the things “worth the agony and the sweat,” were present in spades in TOS and it’s subsequent films. The Motion Picture explored “what its life and what does it mean to be human”. The Wrath of Kahn explored “The passage of Time and coping with old age” as well as the loss of a dear friend, Spock, etc….

“Upbeat” has nothing to do with ignoring life, death, love, the things “worth the agony and the sweat”, in fact it revels in them. Upbeat is about optimism…about knowing that no matter how bad the storm rages tonight, tomorrow’s dawn will restore the calm. “Upbeat” and optimism are about how you face the problems of this life. We either emerge from the sorrows of life with our hope and sense of purpose in mind, or we are forever chained to them, and let them define us for the rest of our lives.

As the wise man said, “either you define the moment, or the moment defines you”.

By: Santiago

Santiago — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 21:36:55 +0000

Nostalgics who wish that Trek remained “upbeat” and ideologically unquestioning about their unambiguously progressive view of anything that comes after anything else (i.e., the “FUTURE”), should heed the complaints of the greatest Trek writers — Ron D Moore, Rene Echeverria, Ira Steven Behr. Specifically, you cannot write drama for “perfect” characters. What made TNG so great, and DS9 even better, was to show that the fundamental issues inherent to the human condition — life, death, love, the things “worth the agony and the sweat,” to quote Faulkner — were still real issues even after an age of techonological and economic progress. Star Trek at its best recognizes this, recognizes the limits of the Enlightenment ideology that it purportedly worshipped, and opened itself up to the deeper, fundamentally religious questions of human existence.