TNG Headed Back To Broadcast Syndication | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

TNG Headed Back To Broadcast Syndication January 27, 2009

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: TNG , trackback

Star Trek The Next Generation is heading back to where it all began. Today CBS announced they have sold reruns of Next Generation for broadcast syndication in most of the country for the Fall 2009 season. Although TNG is currently in reruns on cable, it has not been available for broadcast syndication in eight years.

 

TNG back on regular TV
Starting in the Fall of 1987, Star Trek The Next Generation became a pioneer by becoming a hit hour-long drama broadcast in syndication instead of on a regular broadcast network. The premiere "Encounter at Farpoint" pulled in an historic 27 million viewers on September 28th, 1987. TNG went on to win 18 Emmys and was the first ever syndicated series to be nominated for Outstanding Drama Series.

Now in 2009 TNG returns to its old stomping ground. In a statement, President of Sales for CBS Television Distribution said:

Star Trek The Next Generation was a groundbreaking show when it first premiered in syndication and was the highest-rated series in the STAR TREK franchise. It also has an extremely successful track record in cable so stations are excited to add this proven brand to their lineups.

Unlike the remastered Star Trek The Original Series, which airs weekly in syndication currently, TNG is in ‘strip syndication,’ meaning there will be five episodes per week. CBS has not released a list of stations beyond saying TNG is currently cleared in 83% of the country, including 29 of the top 30 markets and that Tribune, Sinclair, CBS and LIN stations are among those signing up. A spokesperson for CBS also confirmed that this package will be for the original show in standard definition, and not a new ‘remastered’ version of the show.

The broadcast syndication run of Star Trek The Next Generation starts in the Fall of 2009. TNG continues to air on SciFi and WGN America just added the show to it schedule as well (see TrekMovie story).

TNG back then
If you want to feel nostalgic, take a look at these behind the scenes promo for TNG from Entertainment Tonight, aired February 1987.

And here is a 1987 promotional trailer for the show

 

 

Comments

1. AE-35 - January 27, 2009

say it ain’t so!

2. Enterprise - January 27, 2009

Wooo. Too bad I have all the DVDs anyway. At least the DVDs aren’t chopped up, and have huge logos filling most of the screen.

3. Ian - January 27, 2009

I’ve also got the DVD set. And TNG’s on TV often enough. Let me know when they start making a remastered version.

4. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 27, 2009

Please, please, please CBS, put it up ON DEMAND on the CBS website! Yes, I’ll watch the shows with commercials.

5. steve623 - January 27, 2009

I just watched Encounter at Farpoint on WGN tonight. First time I had seen it in years. Some nice memories.

6. Commodore Z - January 28, 2009

Bring on TNG-R!

7. LoyalStarTrekFan - January 28, 2009

This is excellent news. It’s about time TNG gets some recongnition in a time when TOS is on everybody’s minds.

2 and 3, I also have TNG on DVD. Which seems natural since it’s my favorite Trek show.

6, I don’t think that TNG needs to be remastered for the most part. Sure some of the space shots, especially from the first couple of season, could use it but overall I think that it doesn’t need it.

8. Enterprise - January 28, 2009

Last year I worked through all of Enterprise, TOS, the TOS movies, and TNG. I’m starting on DS9 this year in preparation for the movie. It’s been fun.

9. rob - January 28, 2009

well heres my two cents worth on tng

it was really only great for two seasons..those being seasons threee and four. the rest were very spotty…but the strange thing is that season 4 eps, were really sequels or follow up episodes to season 3…so all in all. it really only had one great season

i knew season 5 was in trouble when it opened with darmok…i know some of u guys think its classic…but my god that is a bad ep

10. Enterprise - January 28, 2009

People are so hard on TNG, and give free passes to DS9 and Voyager. TNG was awesome in its run. It brought Star Trek back to mainstream TV, and every season had some of the best Trek out there.

11. Sean Christopher - January 28, 2009

darmok is sacred. Don’t touch it dude.

12. hitch1969© speaks with wise tongue™. - January 28, 2009

cool.

=h=

13. rob - January 28, 2009

Sean Christopher..sorry man….

i touched it… smelled it….. saw it…… and heard it…..thank god i didnt taste it….cause darmok is a piece of shit

14. Enterprise - January 28, 2009

Darmok sucked? Voyager fan, eh?

15. sean - January 28, 2009

i grew up with TOS as a kid (born in 82), and actually enjoyed the movies more…i had 2-4 memorized. when TNG came out i was excited but didnt watch it weekly til season 3….i think it has more quality episodes than TOS b/c they ran 2.33333x longer and per capita i say its still got a better batting average than TOS, but TOS and TNG highs are equal.

i heard it will be difficult for them to remaster TNG like they did TOS b/c TNG was shot and recorded on video and TOS was shot on film and there is a resolution/frams per sec difference which causes problems in remastering

this is me on my soapbox acting like i know what i m talking about alla anchorman: ‘its called san diego, which of course in spanish means……’

16. Sean4000 - January 28, 2009

15, TNG was shot on film and edited on video. FX were created in ~SD resolution. For a remaster to occur, the film would have to be rescanned in HD, re-edited, and HD FX created from scratch. That would be a daunting task for any FX house to handle.

17. James - January 28, 2009

@16 – Sean4000

I was just about to say that ;-)

Yeah, not sure whether TNG-R will ever actually happen. I have them all on DVD, but when I watch them, the FX aren’t actually that bad, considering they’re ~20 years old!

Of course, it’d be cool to see TNG-R, but it’s the amount of time (and money) that Paramount would have to put into it, and what are they going to get out of it? A few DVD/Blu-Ray box-set sales? I can’t see it happening.

And IMO, ‘Darmok’ was a wicked episode! One of my favourites! Proper sci-fi storyline – loved it! I always hated the ‘deus ex machina’ of the Universal Translator – ‘Darmok’ gave it a good, hard kick in the teeth, if only for one episode.

18. toddk - January 28, 2009

I wish everyone wouldnt be so pessimistic about TNG-R, At least they wouldnt have to re-film every single frame from scratch. and concidering how advanced todays visual effects are, I dont think it would be as difficult to do anyways, and yeah, some of the first season episodes could have been better but I think they were more interested in keeping faithful to TOS.

In season 2, the show grew up alot. :)

19. Dom - January 28, 2009

Great! Way to convince everyone that Star Trek’s a load of self-righteous 80s waffle! With luck they’ll see sense and pull the reruns before the end of season one! 80s TV Trek should be buried for the excruciating embarrassment to the Star Trek franchise that it is!

They’d be better off rerunning Voyager than this twaddle!

Roll on the new movie in May!

Grr!

20. James - January 28, 2009

@19 – Dom

Bit difficult to justify slamming TNG so much when it was THE most successful Star Trek series – got better ratings than all of the others…

some episodes in the first two seasons (especially season 2) were shocking. I still cannot bear to put myself through ‘Shades of Gray’ – it makes my soul cry. And WHAT was Troi wearing – she looks like a cheerleader!

But the later series have had a massive impact – they have, to a certain extent, defined the way we look at sci-fi. If it wasn’t for TNG, there wouldn’t be any Babylon 5, Stargate, new BSG, etc.

TNG demonstrated that the sci-fi TV series was a good bet for TV studios. It led the way. Sure it’s flawed, but then again, so is every series of Trek (apart from DS9, which is PERFECT ;-))

21. Commander K - January 28, 2009

Never get tired ofTNG. But they should really start at Season 3 lol.

22. thorsten - January 28, 2009

ILM in 1987, what a magical place…

23. T.U.M. - January 28, 2009

Yes, the syndication model was revolutionary! I remember watching S1 on Channel 29 in Buffalo before it was a FOX affiliate. It gave the show a lot of freedom to find its feet that it might not have had under the scrutiny of a network.

24. Derf - January 28, 2009

…and here I was trying to get through the week without being reminded of John Tesh :(

25. Chadwick - January 28, 2009

I have every trek on DVD (waiting for blu-ray) so this is not that important to me, besides anything broadcasted on cable looks terrible when compared to DVD quality. When I want to watch trek, ill pop a DVD on. But, I do occasionally watch it on TV.

I would hope that TNG gets remastered before going to blu-ray but I have a feeling it wont, so we will get all the shitty special effects in the first few seasons. Then in a couple years they will release the remastered TNG on blu-ray and we the so-called ignorant public will have to buy it again. Well I held out on until the war was over, never spent any money on HD DVD (thank god,) So I think I will hold out on the blu-ray as well. Same with the movies, I want the directors cut of every movie, I want all deleted scenes in the movie. I am not going to buy the Star Trek blu-ray movies twice. So far TOS on blu-ray is sadly the only trek on that format I am going to buy, the fact that The Motion Picture is not the directors cut is a huge pissoff. Yea like Paramount could not predict that HD would be out soon so maybe just maybe the new special effects should have been done in HD, which would be simple enough to scale down.

I HATE MARKETING.

26. AJ - January 28, 2009

TNG deserved a lot of credit for rescuing TV TREK, and one can trim away the dreck, and come up with a boatload of solid eps and character arcs.

Unfortunately, it does not age as well as TOS, and they were stuck with ‘families in space’ far too long.

And it took way too long to hit its stride, and the behind-the-scenes bickering and firings did not help.

27. Devon - January 28, 2009

“Unfortunately, it does not age as well as TOS,”

That is right. TOS aged while TNG hasn’t really ;)

“And it took way too long to hit its stride,”

2-3 seasons?

“and the behind-the-scenes bickering and firings did not help.”

Maybe not behind the scenes, but in front of the camera and what the audience saw it was probably of no relevance as they wouldn’t have cared.

28. SteveinSF - January 28, 2009

Wow how time warps by–22 years!

The first season was such a piece of poo, but much better as time went on.

29. AJ - January 28, 2009

27:

Devon: From what I recall, there was almost a full housecleaning of creative personnel, including David Gerrold and Tracy Torme. Also, a writers’ strike in 1988 didn’t help.

And 2-3 seasons to hit stride today would just never happen. Luckily viewers stayed put for it.

30. Paulaner - January 28, 2009

As a hard-core TOS fan I have to admit that TNG was very, very good. It had some unforgettable touching moments and awesome episodes.

31. Bruce_Wayne - January 28, 2009

There was only one good episode in season one (11001001), and one good episode in season two (Measure of a Man)…Season three upped the bar a little, but they didn’t hit their stride til season 4 and 5, when Moore and Braga took the reins of the writing staff.

I agree with everyone about remastering. Would make me tune in, but doesn’t seem feasible.

Funny how I feel the same about it not aging nearly as well as TOS. I’d rather watch the worst TOS episodes (Way to Eden, Lights of Zetar, Alternative Factor) than the mediocre eps of TNG, which the vast majority of were.

32. Brett Campbell - January 28, 2009

24 – Hilarious!

33. justcorbly - January 28, 2009

WGN, which seems to be in everyone’s cable package, just started rerunning TNG, including a block of three episodes on Tuesday evening.

I hadn’t seen those very first shows for a long time. There’s a (too-) strong TOS influence and Picard and his young First Officer talk too loudly and prance around like someone has surgically inserted a pole in an awkward place. Other than the small command crew, the bridge is empty unless they need a closeup of someone poking at a display screen. (And, explain to me why the ship’s counselor spends so much time on the bridge rather than in her office actually doing her job.)

All ensemble shows start off like this and grow into their own as the actors and the writers work on the characters and their relationships and personalities. Everyone’s still cardboard in these intiial episodes.

34. Cousin Itt - January 28, 2009

Never say never, but it will be a long time before we see TNG-R, or a Blu-Ray release of the series. Unlike TOS, which had a finished negative of a complete show, the filmed elements of TNG were transferred to NTSC video for editing and the majority of the effects were created in the video realm as well. So a film negative doesn’t even exist of this show.

In order to remaster it, they will have to find and rescan each single shot of every show, recreate new visual effects at HD resolutions, then reedit and resync all of this with the original finished audio tracks. This project would make TOS-R seem elementary by comparison – not to mention the cost.

And be happy with your DVD’s – bumped up to Blu-Ray, the standard def version would look very, very bad.

35. justcorbly - January 28, 2009

#10 Entrprise:

People… give free passes to… Voyager.

Not me. The episodes setting up their journey in the wilderness were of interest, as well as the few that wrapped up how htey got home, but most everything in between was bland, boring and predictable. I never like thed characters. Some I actively disliked.

The biggest weakenss of Trek’s core concept is that the story possiblities for a small nmber of characters located in a vehcile, even a starship, are very limited. You need conflict. If all the conflict is between onboard crewmembers, that’s the slippery slope to soap opera. If the conflict is generated by diffent crazy aliens every week. that’s the slippery slope to boredom. You need to introduce antagonists that remain in the story from week to week. I.e., Borg, Klingons, Romulans. Voyager’s contacts with the Borg and other baddies never convinced me.

36. Paulaner - January 28, 2009

#34

I understand the technical reasons, but in 2009 everything is digitally possible. IMO it’s really only a matter of money.

37. Dennis Bailey - January 28, 2009

It’s great that TNG – the most successful and popular Trek television series ever, for Paramount – will be back on broadcast where it belongs.

Dom, if people don’t roll their eyes and laugh at TOS they won’t have a problem with TNG either. LOL

38. andrew - January 28, 2009

Attention CBS
I will pay lotsss of latinum for TNG-R!
Just do it already…. I want to part with this money.

39. Cousin Itt - January 28, 2009

#34 If memory serves, Mike Okuda did say that they were going to do a test of TNG-R with one episode. Perhaps Anthony could shed some light on whether or not that was actually completed. If anything, I’d be curious to see which episode they picked.

Also, I agree with you about money. And remember, remastering this show wouldn’t just be about the space shots. They would have to redo everthing – green screens, phaser shots, mattes, etc.

40. Cousin Itt - January 28, 2009

Oops, sorry, I meant to address that to #36.

41. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 28, 2009

Okay TNG had a few poor episodes (particularly in the first two seasons), but by and large even the worst episodes were on par with or better than a middling sci-fi episode of another series (say, an average episode of Stargate or Babylon 5).

And when TNG is good, it’s great:
Yesterday’s Enterprise
Measure of a Man
Q Who?
Time Squared
The Best of Both Worlds
Remember Me
Cause & Effect
Relics
Chain of Command
Frame of Mind
Parallels

And that’s just for starters… There are also the Moriarty episodes and the ones about Data having nightmares, etc.

42. Daoud - January 28, 2009

35 Agreed on Voyager. The real problem was the antagonism between Maquis and Starfleet crews was supposed to continue a long time. Instead, it was used infrequently as a convenient excuse when a dash of conflict was needed. Suddenly Chakotay or B’elanna felt wronged for some reason. They became ‘one happy crew’ all too quickly. And they didn’t follow through with ‘below decks’ type stories that would have made it interesting. (Funny, JJ & gang managed to do this with LOST so far!)

So, TNG being ‘planet of the week’ worked fairly well though. If anything, I can pull out my original 1987-recorded-off-air video tapes and see how they’ve held up…. At least they won’t be as ‘hacked for commercials’ and ‘imprinted with adbugs’ as today’s syndicateds.

24 John Tesh. Yes, the will-be-the-Andy Rooney of our generation. Did you know that Vitamins K and B12 can save your life? If you add just one serving of spinach a day, you can extend your life for years. Scientists at UC-Davis are investigating how our body responds to spinach. And the conclusion is promising. Just add a bit of spinach to that diet.

43. Adam Cohen - January 28, 2009

What those promos reinforce to me is that STAR TREK belongs back on TV. CBS/Paramount/Viacom/ThePowersThatBe, inc. need to re-establish the franchise’s presence on television. Star Trek movies are fun and all, but Trek has been and always will be a TV show at its heart.

44. Drapera - January 28, 2009

Wow! That 1987 promo sure turns on the wayback machine. I saw it for the first time on the VHS copy of STIV: TVH. That voice of Percy Rodrigues introducing us to what was to come.

Sure, it had a shaky start, but I was there for all seven seasons…even recorded most of them on VHS. Just to have ST once a week, as opposed to just a movie every other year was worth it.

…and who wasn’t tuned in to see what happened in TBOBW part 2!

LLAP

45. rag451 - January 28, 2009

Remaster TNG? Why? It’s perfectly fine as it is. The effects are, for the most part, superb not only for their time but for any time.

Why spend millions making a digital Enterprise-D flip and spin and fire blue phasers instead of orange? Are they going to give Picard a digital combover, or Data a digital facelift? Will the opening score be remastered so we can hear that extra cymbol player who happened to have his mic off in 1987 when they recorded it? Come on…

46. Ensign Ro- (short for Roland) - January 28, 2009

I just can’t jump on the TNG-R bandwagon. When TOS was remastered it was done with the idea of keeping the original 60’s flavor intact. I thing TNG’s effects hold up pretty well even today. Sure, maybe some shots could look better…but the same can be said for a LOT of the remastered TOS shots.

And as far as bashing any of the series…I just can’t do it. I’m too much of a fan. Sure, we all have our favorite series…favorite seasons…favorite episodes. And, yes, some of these have their flaws but overall it is very entertaining television. I’m glad to see Trek in nearly any form or incarnation. It sure as hell beats watching…ahem…Knight Rider…gag!

Bring on May!

And Anthony…thanks for those retro promos for TNG. I remember seeing those back in ’87 and being VERY excited that some new Trek was coming to the airwaves. Good memories.

47. Johannes Kakko - January 28, 2009

They should make a TNG TV-movie based on the Star Trek Countdown Comic

48. Allen - January 28, 2009

At the very least they need to get rid of the construction paper on the consoles in the first 2 seasons. Also a blu-ray compatible re-mastering would be welcome as well.

49. Mark - January 28, 2009

Dammit! Where’s my TNG HD?!

50. utterlee - January 28, 2009

# 45 and 46

TNG doesn’t need remastering because the effects are particularly bad -though I suspect a few look on the ropey side now – it’s because it was finished on hideous 500 line NTSC video-tape and will look abysmal in HD. I imagine new transfers from the camera negs would blow your socks off in comparison.

Plus many of the ship effects were recorded on film too, so if the elements still exist, could be recombined to produce a higher quality version of the old effect – no moaning about cartoony CGI then.

Personally I’d LOVE to see remastered TNG.

51. twoback - January 28, 2009

Thats’s weird I have seen that exact same promo with same exact script with a totally different voice over. The same guy who did all the voice overs for the TNG promos for the first few years and a couple of other promos for 80s shows like Street Hawk. I can’t remember his name but he has passed on now.

52. OneBuckFilms - January 28, 2009

If they do a TNG Remastered, it would have to be done extremely well.

Many of the visual effects, especially after the second and third seasons, were some of the best on television at the time.

As later seasons cam on, they got close to motion picture level.

The earlier episodes could be redone though.

53. Quarksbartender - January 28, 2009

It would be interesting to see what some of the fans could do remastering TNG I think there are some very talented fans out there that could do it. There is a fan that did this to Star Wars its called Star Wars: Revisited.
I would love to see a remastered version of Yesterdays Enterprise, the battle at the end with all the Klingon warships would be awesome.

54. IDIC - January 28, 2009

#45
in a word………YES

55. Dennis Bailey - January 28, 2009

Go to Youtube and type in “star trek” “the next generation” and “promos” and you can see the original ten “countdown” promos for TNG run just before its premiere in 1987.

Good times. :)

56. paustin - January 28, 2009

broadcast syndication is what kept tng and ds9 alive and thriving, and having it only on upn I think really hurt Enterprise and to a much lesser extent Voyager

57. Closettrekker - January 28, 2009

I’ll pass…

58. Captain Dunsel - January 28, 2009

Back when ST:TNG was about to come out, a friend of mine worked at one of the stations that was going to carry the show. He had a copy of the video presentation Paramount made for the STATIONS (not the viewers), that included stuff about the marketing plan and more.

Does anyone remember Star Trek credit cards, from a company called “The Associates”?

59. OneBuckFilms - January 28, 2009

For a Blu-Ray release, they would neet to remaster the series though.

For one thing, most of the work was composited on Video, and the editing was done in the Video domain.

So to prepare TNG for a Blu-Ray release, they would need to:

– Find the individual effects elements, where produced on film, and scan them at 1080P, and recomposit them.
– Find the filmed on-set footage, scan to 1080P, and re-edit to match the original episode edits.
– Remaster the sound for the Dolby TrueHD standards.
– Re-animate things like Phaser shots and other animated effects often created on Video or frame by frame in the computer at NTSC resolution and written out to video.

The amount of work required would be cost prohibitive, and may involve considerably more research to find the original elements, if they exist.

To me, a TNG-R project would not be a viable venture.

60. Mikey1091 - January 28, 2009

I don’t really care if TNG got more time on TV, broadcast sydication or not, since I have the whole series on DVD. What I DO want to see is DS9, Voyager, and TOS brought back to TV at times that are actually convenient and not 2 in the damn morning when I’m sleeping.

61. GaryS - January 28, 2009

Glad TNG is returning to syndication.
Its been gone too long.

62. Chris Basken - January 28, 2009

If they remastered the live-action footage from the original negatives, I think we’d all be pretty shocked at how crappy everything looked. I mean, the props, makeup, sets… they were all designed with the though in mind that you couldn’t see them all that well and filled in the details on your own with your own imagination.

At 1080p, everything will look like plastic and plywood. And they’ll look like clowns in all that makeup.

63. DJ Neelix - January 28, 2009

@46 Ensign Ro:
“I just can’t jump on the TNG-R bandwagon.”

I totally agree. TOS needed a remaster and new effects because the old episodes where in terrible condition and the original effects are just awful.

That is not the case with TNG, the effects look perfectly good enough. For CBS to do a remaster of the entire TNG series? Forget it, it’s not gonna happen (look post 59 if you don’t realise why). Maybe certain episodes such as Encounter at Farpoint and All Good Things, but that’s about it.

The episodes are just as good in SD as they would be in HD. It’s about the stories, remember? Sure, HD certainly enriches the experience, but it’s not THAT important.

“And as far as bashing any of the series…I just can’t do it. I’m too much of a fan.”
Me too. I really pity those who cannot enjoy the entire Star Trek universe. I wasn’t too much of a fan of Enterprise at first, but after letting my prejudice aside, I realised that from season 2 and on, it really wasn’t that bad. Still my least favourite series though.

And to those who bash Darmok… I guess there’s just too much talking and too little of Kirk fist-fighting and bagging alien ladies for your taste. In short, too cerebral.

64. ML31 - January 28, 2009

I’d just like to add my 2 cents to the TNG vs TOS debate.

Both are notable. TOS for being there first and creating iconic characters than no other ST series has yet to come even close to capturing. TNG was notable as it brought ST back into the spotlight and gave the entire ST franchise a major push.

TNG had the best actor in Stewart. But this had the unwanted effect of making the rest of that cast look gawd awful in comparison. (not saying the TOS cast was fantastic, but they didn’t have it made obvious week after week like TNG did) While Stewart could act circles around Shat, Kirk as a far more interesting and fun character than Picard. In fact, the TOS characters were all far more interesting than any of the ‘way too perfect’ TNG characters. And four of the TNG characters were just off shoots of the TOS characters. Troi and Data were just Spock characteristics split into two people, and Picard and Riker were both clones of an aspect of the Kirk character. This sort of leads into a reason why I enjoyed DS9 far more than TNG. The fact that it was not a direct copy of TOS. The setting was different and the entire show just had a different feel to it. TNG always had the feeling they were trying to copy what was done before.

Sure, TNG had superior SPFX, but they had the advantage of 20 years of future technology. TOS did very well for what was available to them. So I consider that a draw.

And then the episodes. TNG did have some stellar episodes. Best of Both Worlds, Heart of Glory, The Inner Light, Tapestry, to name a few. But they had far far more dog episodes that were just plain, well,,,, Dumb. TOS had their share of Dogs too, but the ratio of good eps to bad ones was much better with TOS. That is, the odds of a random draw among TOS eps is far more likely to produce a winning show than a random draw of TNG eps. Which sucks because I’d like to have on DVD only the good episodes, yet they are only available as a complete season set. To make matters worse, to get a a complete version of one of the better eps, you have to buy 2 seasons as part one closed one season and part two began the next. (grrrr) To get the perhaps 2 or 3 good shows from a given season, one is forced to by the entire set. A far cry from buying en entire season of TOS and tollerating the handful of dogs in that season.

Last note… I find it interesting that both TOS and TNG seemed to find their stride AFTER Gene Roddenberry took his hands off of directly running the show. Gene Coon made TOS gel and Rick Berman made TNG gel. Read into that what you like.

65. Dennis Bailey - January 28, 2009

#64: “Last note… I find it interesting that both TOS and TNG seemed to find their stride AFTER Gene Roddenberry took his hands off of directly running the show. Gene Coon made TOS gel and Rick Berman made TNG gel. Read into that what you like.”

Well, according to Robert Justman, Roddenberry did some rewriting on just about every script in TOS’ first year. So it’s hard to say that he “took his hands off,” there…

66. ML31 - January 28, 2009

Dennis Bailey:

Point taken. I will say that injecting some thoughts into the scripts is a far cry from the all the duties that go into producing the show. I know for sure that Shatner felt that things got better when Coon took over. Knowing the production order from that first season, I buy that conclusion.

67. rag451 - January 28, 2009

I don’t like the remastered TOS. Most of the effects look cartoonish or at least as hokey as what they replaced without the personality. Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure all involved have worked hard at producing the remastered TOS, but I cringe every time I see one. I like the Tholian ship that’s had a couple of Enterprise nacelles glued precariously onto it. I like Earth-like planets without clouds and glowing, giant green hands.

Besides, what good does it do to make the Enterprise (original or D) look sleek and stylish when Mark Lenard is still ducking cardboard and styrofoam debris in “Balance of Terror” and Kirk is tossing paper maché boulders at the Gorn?

I don’t mind cleaning the dust off of negatives to get a “clearer” view of the original series, but why, for goodness sakes why, do we need “computer graphics” in a show from the ’60s?

One last note about TNG… If they remaster the series, can we please digitally erase Wesley? Then it might be worth it to me…

Times like these I want my old black & white set with the rabbit ears back…

68. Xai - January 28, 2009

I’m planning on watching. I get only broadcast TV (my choice, there is little on cable/sat that is worth it). A good friend back on broadcast.

YEA!

69. Dr. Image - January 28, 2009

Just watched “the Last Outpost.’
My God, what were they thinking??
Some- many- eps truly sucked.
3rd season = best.

70. Edge - January 28, 2009

#64: Character clones?–not really. I agree with #65: Roddenberry as a writer (and an interferer) hurt the show in many ways. But was a near genius in creating characters. Data was NOT a clone of Spock, he was the exact opposite: a logical being struggling to become human, as opposed to the other way around. Worf and LaForge were great as well, and the actors made them better yet. The only real copy I see was Riker, who was in the first season not much more than a skirt-chaser like Kirk. Picard was Picard. Nothing like him before or since.

All subsequent manifestations of Trek have lacked that character-creating genius. And I totally agree with comment about intra-ship conflict leading to soap-opera episodes. Conflict should be about bigger things. The further back you go, the more profound and applicable are the episodes, if you look past the dated campiness and plot contrivances. Watch “Return of the Archons”, and tell me its message doesn’t apply right now. There are many Landrus out there.

71. THX-1138 - January 28, 2009

Ya’ know, not everything has to be in High Definition. I have seen the TOS remastered episodes in both HD and standard on my 57″ high def flatscreen and the difference is sort of minimal. I would imagine that most folks that have an HD TV wouldn’t get a better picture than me. TNG doesn’t really need remastering. Your BR player will upscale it enough for a really high quality picture and the effects, while not those of BSG, still aren’t stomach-turning.

And to add my $.02, If TOS had been given 5 more years on the air, I’ll bet they could have met the “clunker ratio” that the TNG haters like to wag their fingers at. Science fiction is like that whether it’s TV, movie, or books. There are flashes of brilliance amongst a sea of really bad efforts and/or ideas.

72. COMMANDER KEEN - January 28, 2009

THX-1138:

The real issue for me is the remastering from the original prints to the remastered digital format. When you compare the original broadcasts to the remastered the difference is mindblowing. It doesn’t matter if you see it in HD or not. I am glad they redid the original prints. Imagine how TNG would look. It is going to be harder with TNG because of the issue with Video FX. If they can find the original film they have a chance.

I hope they bring back DS9 on CBS as well. I originally did not like DS9 when it first aired but it later bacame the best trek on TV. DS9 had the best battle scenes in Star Trek and some great character development. I think near the end TNG got a bit tired. But kicked butt with First Contact.

73. AJ - January 28, 2009

71:

THX:

The difference is that I can sit through most TOS clunkers. I’ll Take “Spock’s Brain” and “Turnabout Intruder” any day over “:Last Outpost” or “Aquiel.”

It’s probably because I took them so seriously as a child, but by 1987, could happily trash a bad TNG ep. Most TOS fans can remember all episode names for the “Fine 79,” but find someone who can go beyond a ‘favorites’ list for TNG and beyond.

Let’s just hope the syndicated TNG eps are not chopped up or sped up for more adspace.

74. THX-1138 - January 28, 2009

Well, to each their own I guess.

75. DEMODE - January 28, 2009

TNG is a show that I dont think needs “much” of a remastering. The shots of the ENTERPRISE are beautiful, and most hold up well. ILM did a fantastic job. A few of the alien ships don’t hold up as well, and could be remastered, I suppose. If they do remaster any of the ENT-D effects, I think they should have ILM do them so that they match properly.

76. Steve - January 28, 2009

Great news!

77. Toddk - January 28, 2009

Concider this…98 percent (or higher) of the typical TNG episode dosent involve:

Phaser fire or beams
transporter effects
Space shots and or ships
planets..etc..

my guess is that there would be about 30 minutes of FX per season to redo..to me that does seem reasonable and do-able

78. Sean4000 - January 28, 2009

Oh my God!, play this clip and tell me you wouldn’t want The Enterprise D to look that good!

http://www.edenfx.com/PROJECTS/Enterprise/index.html#2

79. Cygnus-X1 - January 28, 2009

Dar-mok… At…. Ten-ag-ra!!

AHHH!!!

SH-UT….

UP!!!!

I HATE DARMOK!!!!

MOST ANNOYING EPISODE EVER!!!!

80. ML31 - January 28, 2009

#64: Character clones?–not really. I agree with #65: Roddenberry as a writer (and an interferer) hurt the show in many ways. But was a near genius in creating characters. Data was NOT a clone of Spock, he was the exact opposite: a logical being struggling to become human, as opposed to the other way around. Worf and LaForge were great as well, and the actors made them better yet. The only real copy I see was Riker, who was in the first season not much more than a skirt-chaser like Kirk. Picard was Picard. Nothing like him before or since.

All subsequent manifestations of Trek have lacked that character-creating genius. And I totally agree with comment about intra-ship conflict leading to soap-opera episodes. Conflict should be about bigger things. The further back you go, the more profound and applicable are the episodes, if you look past the dated campiness and plot contrivances. Watch “Return of the Archons”, and tell me its message doesn’t apply right now. There are many Landrus out there.

#70

It doesn’t take a genius to know what was popular in one show and try to duplicate that popularity in another. Spock was popular. So he created Data, who had the same characterization that was much of what made Spock popular. Guess what? Data was the most popular character in TNG too. Amazing.
The characters are clones in that they simply took aspects of an original character and turned them into two characters with fewer dimensions. Picard was the stoic side of Kirk. The side with the leadership skills. While Riker was the “skirt-chaser”. The side that would “rush in where angels feared to tread”. So essentially when you had Riker and Picard discussing a mission or orders or something, you are getting essentially Captain Kirk mulling over the same thing.
I will also add that I saw none of Kirk in Sisko. He was a completely original character. Much of that may have been due to how Brooks played him too.

Just because Data and Spock had opposite life goals does not make their primary characteristic different. Data represented the logic/computer side of Spock. The part that infuriated McCoy. Troi was the emotional/telepathic side of Spock. The only difference was that she was empathic and virtually worthless.

Sorry, but LaForge was boring. Burton didn’t inject any kind of life or interest into that character. Worf was the only interesting character on the bridge. His character was so interesting that many of the Worf-centric episodes were among the better ones.

#71

It is very possible that had TOS gone on for 5 more years the ratio of good to bad may have dropped. But the thing is, the ratio of good to bad for TNG was pretty constant. Each year produced only a few good eps. Even while the cast was gelling the writing was still very much more miss than hit. (but you knew they really “jumped the shark” when they introduced Data’s evil twin) While the bulk of the TOS dogs occured in season 3.

Personally, I’d rather sit through 10 Spock’s Brain’s and 12 Way to Eden’s than sit through one TNG ep that was centered on the holodeck, Troi’s mom, questioning weather or not Data is a sentiant being or not, or worst of all, Wesley Crusher.

81. Matt Wright - January 28, 2009

yesss!! brodcast syndication :-) I missed those days when I could tune in every weeknight at 5pm on my local Fox affiliate and find it. I know of course it won’t be at 5pm, but hopefully at say 11 after the news.

82. Matt Wright - January 28, 2009

#15 — Woot for 1982!! I have just about the same story, raised on TOS, knew the first four movies by heart. TNG was a bit weird to me and I didn’t start watching it regularly until season 2.

83. Sean4000 - January 28, 2009

Matt Wright, just a harmless little question, how old are you my friend?

84. Ralph F - January 28, 2009

I’m in the last few eps of Season 7 on DVD; my family got me the full series set for Dad’s Day last year. Been a lot of fun — some great, great episodes and some duds. And though the effects were quite good sometimes; yeah, I wouldn’t say no to a TNG-R run.

85. Matt Wright - January 28, 2009

#83 — I’ll be 27 in Feb.

86. Scott - January 28, 2009

Timeless show.

87. James Heaney - Wowbagger - January 28, 2009

Wil Wheaton, you’re such an adorable geek. ^^

88. Will_H - January 28, 2009

What Id see happening with TNG-R is of course the negatives being redone into HD, but as for the FX, I think there’s a lot of episodes where battles were meant to look a lot more exciting but with the budget and models, they just couldnt do it. Think about Best of Both Worlds when the Borg Cube keeps slamming the engineering section. There’s supposed to be hull breaches and people getting sucked out into space, but there’s no sign of damage. If they brought in some CGI there we could actually see that area of hull getting blown away, people getting blown out into space, etc. So I think that’s where we’d see the most difference, the space battles. That was one of the nice things about VOY, technology was up to date enough to provide us with a believable space fight between two ships…well for the most part, Voyager going up against a Tactical Cube and living to tel about it was a joke.

But I think if TNG was easy to find on TV people would watch it because Star Trek is meant for TV more than movies. Id love to see a new series, though honestly I wouldnt want JJ to do it.

89. AdamTrek - January 28, 2009

Forget TNG-Remastered.

Give me Season 8.

=A=

90. James Heaney - Wowbagger - January 28, 2009

#73 AJ: From memory: Encounter at Farpoint Part I and Part II, The Naked Now, Haven, and Hide and Q, Code of Honor, Last Outpost, Where No One Has Gone Before, Lonely Among Us, The Big Goodbye, Datalore, Justice, the Battle, Home Soil, Angel One, Coming of Age, 11001001, When The Bough Breaks and Too Short a Season, Symbiosis, The Arsenal of Freedom, Heart of Glory, Skin of Evil, We’ll Always Have Paris, Conspiracy, The Neutral Zone.

The Child, Where Silence Has Lease, The Dauphin, The Outrageous Okona, The Schizoid Man, Elementary My Dear Data, and The Royale, Loud as a Whisper, Manhunt, Pen Pals, Unnatural Selection, Contagion, Time Squared, A Matter of Honor, Samaritan Snared, The Measure of a Man, The Icarus Factor, The Emissary and Up The Long Ladder and Peak Performance and Shades of Gray and Q Who.

The Survivors, Who Watches the Watchers, Tin Man, The Bonding, The Enemy, The Hunted, The Price, The High Ground, The Offspring, and Yesterday’s Enterprise, Booby Trap, Deja Q, The Defector, Sins of the Father, The Vengenance Factor, A Matter of Perspective and Menage a Trois, Hollow Pursuits, the Most Toys, Captain’s Holiday, Sarek, Transfigurations, the Best of Both Worlds Part I.

The Best of Both Worlds Part II, Family, Brothers, Suddenly Human, Remember Me, Half A Life, Future Imperfect, Reunion, The Loss, Data’s Day, Final Mission, the Wounded, First Contact, Galaxy’s Child, Clues, Identity Crisis, The Host, Devil’s Due, Night Terrors and Qpid, The Nth Degree, The Drumhead, The Mind’s Eye, In Theory, Legacy, Redemption

Redemption Part II, Darmok, The Game, Ensign Ro, Disaster, A Matter of Time, Silicon Avatar, Unification Part I and Part II, Violations, New Ground, Hero Worship, the Masterpiece Society, Conundrum, Ethics, Power Play, Cause and Effect, The First Duty, The Innter Light, I Borg, Imaginary Friend, The Next Phase, Time’s Arrow.

Alright, I’m bored. There are a handful of dropped episodes in there, because remembering 179 episodes (or, in the case of the five seasons I did, 131 episodes) is a lot harder than remembering just 79, but I think I’ve made my point.

I can also do Enterprise, though less reliably. Now, can you do TOS, by season, from memory?

It continues to amaze me how a mainstream site like TrekMovie.com has managed to attract such a large group of fringe TOS-philes. TOS-philes who, strangely, think that their Trek is still the mainstream version. I love TOS, but that idea is just not true.

91. Spock's Brain - January 28, 2009

90. James Heaney – Wowbagger wrote: “It continues to amaze me how a mainstream site like TrekMovie.com has managed to attract such a large group of fringe TOS-philes. TOS-philes who, strangely, think that their Trek is still the mainstream version. I love TOS, but that idea is just not true.”

TOS is still the best. (With DS9 as the best ‘spinoff’ Trek).

I don’t buy cable/satellite so this is great news.

92. WannaBeatle - January 28, 2009

it’s nice to hear that TNG is back on normal free TV again.

on a side note, my mother was a semi-featured extra on Farpoint and got to meet Andy Probert. He had showed her around the various sets and gave her a little sketch (signed and dated) of the Enterprise D to give to me. I think I still have that same sketch somewhere in my room, I should scan it and post it on my myspace page soon…it’s pretty cool.

93. Andrew - January 28, 2009

TNG had its greatest successes with two kinds of episodes…

1. Action-adventure episodes. The Best of Both Worlds and Yesterday’s Enterprise are amongst the most compelling productions in the history of Trek.

2. Twilight-zone style character dramas. Whatever you think of the sub-genre, episodes like Inner Light or Tapestry are that sub-genre at its best (I’ll get to my reservations about this category at the end…)

So what was missing?

3. TOS had a legitimate horror element that was greatly diluted in the later series. For example, can you think of a creature that left as big an impression, given less than 60 seconds of screen time, as the Salt Monster? For the Star Trek ethos to mean anything, it has to be played out in a universe that’s a little bit scary.

However, the legitimate problem that TNG and later series creators faced was that it was easier to scare viewers in the 1960s, in a pre-Friday the 13th/Nightmare on Elm Street culture, than it was in the 1980s and after.

4. TOS was much better at high-concept sci-fi episodes than the later series were. It often seemed that the producers of TNG didn’t understand the difference between sci-fi and using technobabble to dress up plots that could be part of a standard police or medical dramas.

Again, however, the TNG producers had a more difficult job than the original series creators. In 1967, for instance, it was possible to go the mirror universe and come up with interesting and entertaining episode just by hanging around that universe for an hour. By 1987, because the original series had had the first crack at many of the big ideas, it was harder to do a basic high-concept plot without coming across as a straight ripoff, so contrivances had to be added to the high-concept stuff (the best examples here being the DS9 mirror episodes).

Were these problems insurmountable? Or did the creators not rise to the occasion?

Finally, to my mind, the biggest strike against the creators of TNG in particular was the fact that many of the best TNG episodes (Yesterday’s Enterprise, Inner Light, Tapestry, and some “good” episodes like Parallels and the one where the Enterprise-D keeps blowing up over and over again) required taking the characters out of the “reality” of the Star Trek universe. What was it that made the TNG producers unable to come up with interesting plots for their characters in their primary continuity?

94. AJ - January 28, 2009

James Heaney-Wowbagger:

I stand corrected.

But “Code of Honor” was ep #3.

I honestly don’t see the value of your post. I can cite TOS titles based on plot points or small details. but I cannot do a rote recitation of episodes in order per season. That’s why I own Compendiums.

To get to the more important part of your post:

“It continues to amaze me how a mainstream site like TrekMovie.com has managed to attract such a large group of fringe TOS-philes. TOS-philes who, strangely, think that their Trek is still the mainstream version. I love TOS, but that idea is just not true.”

Have a look at mainstream TV today. Shatner’s picking up Emmys for BL, doing a talk show, priceline and WoW ads, and starring as himself in films. Takei is on Howard Stern, and he and Nichols are doing guest-spots on Heroes. Nimoy was on Stephen Colbert promoting his new book of nudes last year. There is a massive new film in the can which is starting to generate real buzz. They’ve also just remastered TOS entirely with new FX.

Robot Chicken did a TWOK opera. Congressmen of a certain age refer to Klingons on Capitol Hill. They’re not referring to Gowron.

TOS has managed to stay more alive in pop culture than all other Treks. Look at the “licensee” thread. Of all Treks, TOS is top of mind now.

95. Fatman Bruno - January 28, 2009

Best of both worlds remastered, rereleased on bluray… or top ten episodes rereleased in bluray, how hard could that be?
Shouldn’t take that much time and expense

96. MeMoiMeeee - January 28, 2009

eff all of you.

just eff all of you.

I’m a Trek fan since I first watched TOS when I was 5. (I was a “gifted child” or so some one seemed to think).

Trek has been the one consistent in my life.

I love all the series and movies.

I love all of it. Trek has literally kept me from diving off a 20 story building.

Trek is therapy that I have never found from some ersatz psychotherapist

Kiss my royal arse if you don’t like Trek. STFU and trash something else.

97. James Heaney - Wowbagger - January 28, 2009

#94 AJ: “Most TOS fans can remember all episode names for the “Fine 79,” but find someone who can go beyond a ‘favorites’ list for TNG and beyond.” I found you one. I can, of *course*, name virtually any episode of any series when given a plot point.

I really wasn’t sure what your point was in the first place, but, rather than question it, I decided to show off. It’s fun, and demonstrating a falsehood is always simpler than arguing against it.

And, no, they’re not in order – they’re organized metrically to fit into a song by I believe his name is Brett Hodgetts called “The Next Generation Episode Guide.” They are, however, grouped by season.

Now, as for the present day–we can play Celebrity Watch all day, if you like, but I don’t see any particular need to demonstrate that the TNG and beyond stars are still notorious and thriving (and most of them are still in acting, at that!) much like their TOS predecessors. The new film is about to go a long way (we all hope) towards revitalizing the TOS brand, but its not as if TOS has been powerhousing its way through the culture in the last fifteen years.

Neither have DS9 or ENT, to be fair, but TNG? Yeah. And now it’s going back into syndication, after considerably less time in the sci-fi wilderness than its earlier counterpart. Whoohoo!

98. Magic_Al - January 28, 2009

If TNG is to on anybody’s air 10-15 years from now it will have been remastered. It’s not primarily about special effects, it’s about the master tapes being 480i when we live in a digital world. LCDs cannot render interlaced video so TNG suffers from the softening effect of line-doublers to up-convert it to 480p. Even TOS in standard definition looks better than that, because its HD/film masters scale to native 480p.

Being trapped on NTSC videotape threatens to leave TNG behind as a 20th century relic. Even YouTube videos are made in HD now. Kids aren’t going to want to watch this blurry show.

99. Buzz Cagney - January 28, 2009

#98 I’ve long since left TNG behind as a relic. Not so much for technical reasons- just in general.

100. utterlee - January 29, 2009

#98 – Spot on. Not only are the master tapes in 480i fuzzyvision, they suffer from the wierd discolouration that the NTSC process inflicts on pictures. It probably looks worse by the time it’s been converted to PAL too, which is why I’m so keen on a lovely HD re-transfer.

At the moment the TNG season box sets are up for about £12 each on Amazon, which seems a bargain, but then I don’t wanna fork out again if they’re going to be released on Blu-ray. Could be a long wait though…

101. I am Kurok! - January 29, 2009

Ancient Arab proverb: If it moves, sell it!

102. Star Trackie - January 29, 2009

..blecch…

Wait til new fans see JJ’s colorful, high-octain adventure Star Trek, then tune into TNG’s Melrose Space on their local station. Talk about hitting a brick wall from a full sprint.

103. Admiral Kent - January 29, 2009

96. So how’s that therapy goin’?

104. Star Trackie - January 29, 2009

#90 “It continues to amaze me how a mainstream site like TrekMovie.com has managed to attract such a large group of fringe TOS-philes. TOS-philes who, strangely, think that their Trek is still the mainstream version. I love TOS, but that idea is just not true.”

True, this site, because of the new TOS based movie, has attracted MANY TOS fans, like myself who, for the last 20 years, have been turned off by the new direction Trek had taken. And also true, to some degree, is the fact that somewhere along the last 20 years TOS lost it’s way, overshadowed by what was on the air, seemingly 5 days a week, TNG and it’s spin-offs. That was the studios new cash cow and that was the version the studio nurtured. So it’s not surprising, that for many, whose only exposure was to Snore Trek, the boring and painfully unimaginative 24th century was mainstream. But as the saying goes, familiarity breeds contempt, and by the time Enterprise tried to stamp out more of the same o’ same o’, for the hundredth time, the mainstream had had enough and FINALLY, that tired beaten old horse was buried.

Not that people didn’t like it, a lot of fans cut their teeth on that so I guess nostalgia keeps it close to their hearts. I mean a LOT of people like All My CHildren, it’s just not my cup of tea. But the 24th century has run it’s course, literally, and I couldn’t be happier.

Now Flash forward only 3 or 4 years and Trek is riding high again thanks to a return to the old school mentality of presenting Star Trek as a rollicking, fun adventure with heart. The upcoming film, like its’ TOS counterpart, is so radically different from the hundreds of hours of Berman’s boring escapades, that it’s looked upon as fresh, exciting and new. For many of us TOS-philes, movie goers and science fiction fans who never embraced the watered down New-age Trek of late, the wait truly IS over.

105. Closettrekker - January 29, 2009

#80—“Personally, I’d rather sit through 10 Spock’s Brain’s and 12 Way to Eden’s than sit through one TNG ep that was centered on the holodeck, Troi’s mom, questioning weather or not Data is a sentiant being or not, or worst of all, Wesley Crusher.”

Agreed.

#90—“It continues to amaze me how a mainstream site like TrekMovie.com has managed to attract such a large group of fringe TOS-philes.”

TOS-philes?

I suppose if that means people who prefer TOS and its wonderful characters, then count me as a TOS-phile.

No Star Trek spinoff series has ever come close to matching the quality of the TOS icons. Those fantastic characters cover the stink of even its worst clunkers.

I can name 20-25 great TOS episodes very easily, and I could watch any of the 79 total episodes and have a wonderful time in doing so. Even the bad ones are enjoyable. I cannot think of 20 episodes of TNG that I can even sit through—and that show ran for 7 seasons!

Picard, Data, etc…Those are true sci-fi icons. No doubt about that.

Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty–on the other hand…Those are popular icons. And there is a difference.

#104—“The upcoming film, like its’ TOS counterpart, is so radically different from the hundreds of hours of Berman’s boring escapades, that it’s looked upon as fresh, exciting and new. For many of us TOS-philes, movie goers and science fiction fans who never embraced the watered down New-age Trek of late, the wait truly IS over.”

Very well said!

106. zan - January 29, 2009

“For many of us TOS-philes, movie goers and science fiction fans who never embraced the watered down New-age Trek of late, the wait truly IS over.”

Well, prepare to be disappointed. The new film is going to suck.

107. Closettrekker - January 29, 2009

#106—So you’ve seen it? How did you manage that?

The rest of us have to wait.

108. Closettrekker - January 29, 2009

#90—“Now, can you do TOS, by season, from memory?”

Yep.

The Man Trap, Charlie X, Where No Man Has Gone Before, The Naked Time, The Enemy Within, Mudd’s Women, What Are Little Girls Made Of?, Miri, Dagger Of The Mind, The Corbomite Manuever, The Menagerie (I and II), The Conscience Of The King, Balance Of Terror, Shore Leave, The Galileo Seven, The Squire Of Gothos, Arena, Tomorrow Is Yesterday, Court-Martial, Return Of The Archons, Space Seed, Errand Of Mercy, The Alternative Factor, City On The Edge Of Forever, Operation: Annihilate!

That’s just season one, but I’m sure you get the point. That’s the first 26.

12 of those are among my absolute favorites. There are only 2 in that first season that I think are not so good. The rest fall somewhere in between.

Compare that to season one of TNG.

Nevermind. There is no comparison.

109. Tango - January 29, 2009

9 rob–

If you did not like Darmok then all I could say is:

Shaka, when the walls fell.

110. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 29, 2009

I have never run into such a group of sour-pusses than on this site.

TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT — these are television shows. Some episodes are good, some are not. I hate how many fans put one on a pedestal, and another (or all the others) in the gutter.

TOS, great — The Cage, The Corbomite Maneuver
TOS, terrible — The Conscience of the King, Spock’s Brain

TNG, great — Yesterday’s Enterprise, Chain of Command
TNG, terrible — Any and all Lwaxana Troi episodes

I can go on with the rest of the series, but I’ll cut to the chase: I am a Star Trek fan, I like Star Trek in all its stripes, and that means that I am willing to overlook episodes I don’t like. How hard is that?

111. James Heaney - Wowbagger - January 29, 2009

#108: Of course, I can turn around and say “Compare TOS3 to TNG3,” and, again, no comparison.

Very simply, I have no problem if you have a taste for TOS over TNG. There is no episode of Star Trek that I can’t sit through except “Precious Cargo,” but I do have a win-suck ratio, and, as far as I was concerned, TNG and TOS had very similar ones. If you don’t agree, that’s your affair. I’m with 4815162342–it’s all Star Trek, and, so far, there’s very little among it that I find outright hateful

What I object to is these people *constantly* coming into the TNG threads and hammering on the show as if it was somehow *objectively* inferior to TOS or that it *objectively* has a lesser pop culture presence (and, again, among younger people, the *opposite* is true). The extraordinary *arrogance* of many TOS fans in here, who have apparently decided that the world is finally coming around to their view that the last twenty years of Star Trek sucked (it isn’t, and they didn’t) is a source of continuing surprise to me… and it’s aggravating. The TNG fans don’t pick these fights–time and time again, it’s the TOS fans jumping in for *no* apparent reason and noting that “Oh, yeah, TNG was fine, but, compared to TOS, it sucked.”

I mean, my God, at this rate, this new bunch of people are going to bring back the Kirk vs. Picard debate in all its flamewar glory–and they seem to enjoy the prospect!

Certainly not everyone does this – Dennis Bailey can always be counted on as a rational voice (outside of TNZ :P), Closettrekker at least doesn’t *start* the fights, and there are others who are happy to just note their preference and *move on* – but, when I refer to the aggressive TOS-phile fringe, this determination to pick TOS vs. Everything Else fights is what I’m talking about.

We’re all, in theory, Star Trek fans. Can we just go with that and leave off the senseless bashing?

112. Star Trackie - January 30, 2009

#111 “We’re all, in theory, Star Trek fans.”

Not really. While so many love to lump it all into one basket, “Star Trek “implies the series from 1966 to 1968 only. Everyone that loves Mork and Mindy isn’t automatically a “Happy Days” fan. I can also love “All in the Family” without having to like or embrace “Maude”. Star Trek is no different. The classic original and TNG and it’s spin-offs are radically different, they just happen to be set in the same fictional universe.

113. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 30, 2009

#112 — Star Trackie –“#111 ‘We’re all, in theory, Star Trek fans.’ Not really. While so many love to lump it all into one basket, ‘Star Trek ‘ implies the series from 1966 to 1968 only. ”

No, to *you* “Star Trek” is TOS only. That does not entitle you to make this assertion as if it were fact. All the other shows are Star Trek in virtue of being part of the same franchise, with a shared back-story. You are making a blatant attempt to raise your personal preferences to the level of gospel truth.

It’s one thing to state honestly that you value TOS above all the others. But this whole farce of laying claim to what is ‘real’ and ‘true’, discounting others’ tastes as *objectively* erroneous (as #111 points out), is nothing short of snobbish and, quite frankly, offensive.

114. Closettrekker - January 30, 2009

#113—I think that, literally, Star Trackie is correct.

Only TOS was called “Star Trek”.

The spinoffs were as follows:

Star Trek: The Next Generation
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Star Trek: Voyager
Enterprise (and later on, Star Trek: Enterprise)

As for the opinions of myself and others, of course it is subjective. That is the very nature of opinions.

115. Star Trackie - January 30, 2009

#114 “Only TOS was called “Star Trek”.”

Yep.

#113 “No, to *you* “Star Trek” is TOS only.”

Correct. No one would ever watch “Star Trek: The Next Generation” and believe for one minute that they were watching an episode of “StarTrek.” No more than anyone watching an episode of “The Jeffersons” would mistake it for an episode of “All in the Family.” They share the same fictional universe but that is where any similarities end.

116. Dom - January 30, 2009

37. Dennis Bailey ‘Dom, if people don’t roll their eyes and laugh at TOS they won’t have a problem with TNG either. LOL’

At least TOS is never boring, even when it’s crap! ;)

TNG was successful at the time because TV back then was being pussified. My generation (yes, the much-reviled MTV Generation) in the UK was used to TV having some balls.

We grew up with The A-Team firing machine guns and Airwolf giving communists and Central American dictators a well-deserved kicking (even if wen knew the CIA was responsible for some of them existing in the first place!) ;)

In the mid-eighties the Doctor Who serial Resurrection of the Daleks featured almost 80 on-screen deaths by machine gun, acid gas, Dalek weaponry and human controlled lasers. Seven people die in the opening minute of the show, mowed down by men dressed as police officers. No campy nonsense like the current milksop show that uses the name ‘Doctor Who’, just solid, nasty violence!

Blakes 7 saw its original main character, Blake, bloodily gunned down in the series’ final moments, along with all but one of the main cast. One suspects that Avon was killed over the closing credits! After four years, our dubious ‘heroes’ got nowhere and their crusade ended in utter failure!

The late-80s to early-90s gave us TNG, Quantum Leap, Beverley Hills 90210 and that most offensive of all shows, Baywatch. It turned Superman into a romantic comedy. TNG stems from a rancid self-deluded era which gave us sappy ‘heroes': Riker had to look to ‘Daddy’ Picard because he didn’t have the balls to be Kirk, the women in Baywatch all had to have boob jobs to be women, Sam Beckett was an emasculated hero and his masculine sidekick, Al, was forced to look at and not touch the pretty girls! The only ray of hope in that era was Twin Peaks, which led to The X-Files, a much more significant cultural landmark in the 1990s than TNG ever was.

That TNG did well at the time was a sign of the garbage that was being put on our screens in that era. Thankfully, Babylon 5 (heavily influenced by Blake’s 7, no less) broke Star Trek’s stranglehold on TV science fiction and spelled the beginning of the Trek franchise’s slow-death. The Twin Peaks-influenced The X-Files and Buffy, the Vampire Slayer finally brought some fizz back into genre TV, making TV Trek seem ever more dated.

Ultimately, Ron Moore shook off the shackles that stopped him taking DS9 as far as he wanted and gave us Galactica, the sort of show a lot of us waited 20 years to see!

End of the day, TNG had some good moments (other than Conspiracy, I think they’re nuts to show seasons one and two again!) but is too 80s California hippie-dippie (therapist on the bridge: SPIT!), too naive (‘Hey everybody lets sit in a circle and talk a lot!’) and generally too soft to have any relevance to the generations who watch it now.

TOS and DS9 existed in worlds where there was a palpable threat, something everyone in this decade understands. TNG, by being so high handed in its ‘lessons’ and featuring human beings so dehumanised that had ceased to be real humans any more represents a cul-de-sac for human development and a major creative cul-de-sac for Star Trek as a TV show. TNG is a cultural irrelevance: a shocking, punch-pulling failure as a Star Trek series that was more interested in creating a fascist utopia in the present day than actually giving us rounded characters we care about who speak to us about the world today. It defined modern TV Star Trek as being set in a peculiar universe other than our own and ultimately, as audiences wised up, it sewed the seeds of its own destruction and that of the film series, its spin-offs and the reputation of the Star Trek franchise itself. Truly the McDonalds of sci-fi – all junk and no meat!

Do I think TNG should be shown along with Abrams’ more relevant film that ties into the current zeitgeist? No way!

117. Star Trackie - January 30, 2009

116- Well said!

… and sadly…so very very true.

118. StalwartUK - January 30, 2009

116 – The world would disagree with you.

119. Closettrekker - January 30, 2009

#118—Then I suppose we are “other-worldly”…

120. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - January 30, 2009

Star Trackie and Closettrekker —

Why do you come into a TNG thread to flame? Why do you feel that you need to put on airs with your fellow fans?

Your arguments are without substance, pure semantics. By the criterion set forth in 113 & 114, not even the OS crew films qualify, because they were titled “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” and “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” etc. (Ironically, the latest movie qualifies under the criterion, as it is simply titled “Star Trek”.)

Star Trek, the original series, is great — I am a fan, I enjoy it. But that universe was never meant, by its creator or the writers who drafted screenplays, to be hermetically sealed. It is the height of pretension to appoint yourselves authorities on the subject. The reality is, other things besides TOS *are* Star Trek (though only TOS and the new movie are ‘Star Trek’), but for you, only TOS has merit. If you just framed it like that, instead of trying to adopt a righteous, self-important attitude about it, you’d be well within your rights.

This is not a Star Trek club you can evict me – or anyone else – out of.

121. DJT - January 31, 2009

It’s 2009. Remaster the damn thing. And don’t Eff it up. Do it right the first time.

Remember. The whole world is watching.

Nuff said.

122. Closettrekker - January 31, 2009

#120—Calm down, my friend.

I like some of the spinoffs as well. And no one is kicking you out of anything. Personally, these debates are simply fun to me. There is no malice intended.

And there is absolutely nothing “self-righteous” about preferring one series over another. That’s absurd. It is an expression of opinion. That’s it. My opinion is no more valid than yours. Let’s make that clear.

“By the criterion set forth in 113 & 114, not even the OS crew films qualify, because they were titled “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” and “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” etc.”

I’d agree with that logic. Using very literal semantics, that’s absolutely true. I don’t think there is any question that the film series is quite different from the 1960’s television show, and in far more ways than one.

123. James Heaney - Wowbagger - January 31, 2009

#122: There *is* something self-rightgeous about what Trackie, Dom, et. al. are doing–for instance, I was just told that being a “Star Trek” fan entails necessarily only TOS. This is not only spiritually false, but semantically false. Except for the first two seasons of “Enterprise” (and S3’s “The Xindi”), all versions of Star Trek have had “Star Trek” or “Star Trek [Roman Numeral]” as the title, with all additional data appearing in a subtitle. When one says he is a fan of “Star Trek,” he is symbolically (semantically) referring to some or all of those entities that share the title “Star Trek.” (It is generally understood to include the first two seasons of ENT, as well, but this is not semantically necessary.) This is dramatically different from a “shared universe” principle (i.e. the All in the Family ‘verse), but refers specifically to *the shared title of the work*!

It is *possible* to be a fan of “Star Trek” and not enjoy anything outside TOS, but one can just as easily be a Star Trek fan and enjoy absolutely nothing except the first five seasons of Voyager. (I *know* such fans.)

This semantic silliness aside, the problem I have (and I suspect it’s the same as #120’s) is that many of the posters here aren’t making subjective claims, which are well and good and something I respect. They’re making *objective* claims (ex: “TNG only succeeded because TV was being pussified at the time.”) in an attempt to attack the show and insult its fandom. It’s stupid, wrongheaded, demonstrably false, and, what’s more, it’s trolling. Which is just annoying.

Malice is not intended by you–which is why I like you–but it is intended by some of those who agree with you.

124. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - February 1, 2009

#122 Closettrekker, I appreciate your willingness to discuss this rationally, but you have misinterpreted me.

I do not have any issue with anyone’s preferences. Reread #113 Star Trackie, and you will see preferences do not enter into the post. It is an assertion that only fans of TOS qualify as Star Trek fans. The post is not about “literalness” — a misnomer, for actually this matter would be an instance of the use-mention distinction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use%E2%80%93mention_distinction), if it weren’t patently obvious that Star Trackie isn’t interested in the intellectual, and quite trivial, question of ‘Star Trek’ (with quotes) versus Star Trek (without quotes).

I reiterate what 123 James Heaney, Wowbagger, with whom I wholly agree, observes: “It is *possible* to be a fan of ‘Star Trek’ and not enjoy anything outside TOS, but one can just as easily be a Star Trek fan and enjoy absolutely nothing except the first five seasons of Voyager.”

Bottom line: (1) No fan gets to decide what is or is not Star Trek, because that is a question of fact not opinion. Go to startrek.com if you really have a question about what that comprises. (2) No fan gets to decide who is or is not a Star Trek fan.

125. I Am Morg Not Eymorg - February 1, 2009

37. Dennis Bailey – January 28, 2009

” Dom, if people don’t roll their eyes and laugh at TOS they won’t have a problem with TNG either. LOL”

No, TNG just cause my eyes to shut.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

126. Markus McLaughlin (linuxglobe.wordpress.com) - February 1, 2009

What I would like to see happen with TNG back in syndication, follow ups on the entire TNG cast, what are they doing now, perhaps Michael Dorn, Marina Sirtis, and Wil Wheaton providing both behind-the-scenes chat and trivia questions asked of each episode; Michael Okuda providing text commentary of each episode; Tributes to Gene Roddenberry, Majel Barrett-Roddenberry, Mark Lenard, Paul Winfield, Merritt Butrick, and James Doohan as well. These new short video segments could be added to the eventual Blu-Ray TNG discs.

127. Commander Decker - February 1, 2009

#112 — I agree with you. For example, I like Law and Order and Law and Order: SVU, but I don’t like Law and Order: Criminal Intent. There not all the same.

I like TOS better then TNG. Infact, I hope after this that TOS Remastered goes into 5 days a week syndication again.

128. Christine - February 2, 2009

Noooooooooooo!!! Deanna is NOT telepathic!!! She’s EMPATHIC.

-shot down-

‘Kay. Had to get that out of my system. ^__^;;

Whoot-whoot! I can never find TNG online, so yay! I hope they eventually show Unification (both parts) and Sarek. I love those episodes. So much. 8D

129. Eugene - February 12, 2009

As previous posters have stated, there are several issues facing a potential “TNG-R”:

1. The Good: Many (if not all) of the “traditional” scenes (e.g., basic dialogue, walking through the passageways) were shot on 24 fps 35 mm film, which has more than enough resolution for an HD remaster.

2. The Bad: Many (if not all) of the SFX (phasers, alien energy shimmers, certain starfields, certain composite ship fly-bys) were created in video, and only exist in 30 fps.

3. The Ugly: The only masters that exist of each episode are on tape. That’s right, 480i NTSC tape. Upscale that to HD resolution. Ugly. That’s right.

4. The Expensive: Since film elements for the bulks of each episode still exist, at least one wouldn’t have to drag Patrick Stewart back to the studio to reshoot scenes. All of the NTSC SFX, however, would need to be redone in HD. On top of that, a new HD master tape would need to be created. That’s a fair bit of work. The kind of work that would justifiably lead Paramount to either (a) charge much latinum for each boxset or (b) just skip the idea altogether.

Beyond the technical issues, all of the props and sets on TNG were originally designed for NTSC TV. HD remastering would only reveal the flaws inherent – remember the funky dark lighting in Generations designed to prevent anyone from seeing anything?

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.