Shuttle Pod – The TrekMovie.com Podcast Now on iTunes + Episode 2: How Well Has TNG Aged?

SP_Ep002

The Next Generation may not be celebrating an important milestone (like VOY’s 20 years this year or TOS’s 50 years next year), but we felt it was time to take a look back at what is arguably the most commercially successful incarnation of the Star Trek franchise.

This week, Brian and Jared are joined by Kayla Iacovino to talk about The Next Generation. How does it stand up to a modern audience? If you were to remake TNG for 2015, what would you change? What would you keep the same? The trio dive into topics such as characters, story lines, message, and even costumes, set dressings, and hair styles. And starting today, you can listen to the podcast on iTunes or on Pocket Casts!

 

Shuttle Pod: Episode 2 – How Well Has TNG Aged?

Well, you all seemed to enjoy our first pass at podcasting when we debuted Episode 1 a couple weeks ago. So, for better or worse, we’re back! As always, please leave your thoughts and feedback in the comments section below.

You can also subscribe to Shuttle Pod on iTunes or Pocket Casts (available on iOS, Android, and Windows). Use this link to subscribe with your podcast app of choice.

 


 

Sort by:   newest | oldest

TNG was of it’s time.

For Christ’s sake, why is this site, called Trek”MOVIE”.com always trying to stuff baldy and his band of boring misfits down our throats?

“but we felt it was time to take a look back at what is arguably the most commercially successful incarnation of the Star Trek franchise.”

That’s just silly. Are you freaking kidding me??? LOL

The blu-rays don’t sell. Hardly anyone under 20 recognizes the show. Yet, TOS is still mas-sively iconic, and like them or not, has a series of movies that is repeatedly making 10 times what the last TNG movie grossed.

Again, are you freaking kidding me??? LOL

@ Prodigal Son

Thanks for making your opinion known Captain Kirk…. I happen to love The Next Generation.

If you (because you’re a billionaire) remake TNG, please change its name. There have been lots of Trek generations (iterations, really) since the 80’s.

I love TNG, but it really is of its time. A good number of eps are ageless, but most are becoming dated — especially anytime a character talks about computers.

If you have those billions, make a new show with a good solid concept to advance Trek.

Please.

@the posters above

“”Star Trek: The Next Generation” had the highest ratings of any “Star Trek” that had ever existed. It is arguably the most sucessful iteration of Trek. If it were not for TNG’s overall success, DS9 and Voyager would not have existed.

While it is starting to age, similar to TOS, TNG seems to maintain a sense of post modernism.

Watched every episode of TNG in the 80’s and 90’s…realizing the show’s potential…hoping it may someday actually live up to it’s namesake. It rarely did. Instead it created its own watered down version that seemed like an endless voyage of techno-babble infused mediocrity that, sadly, also served as a foundation for 3 more, equally un-inspired, spin-offs. Stopped watching TNG in 1994 and have only returned for the remastered version of Yesterday’s Enterprise…an alternate reality I wish the TNG crew had stayed in.

Give TNG a little more credit… It may not be as iconic as TOS, but it is still iconic. Most people under 20 will not know Citizen Kane or Nosferatu, does that make them obsolete..? I think TNG in many ways was a much better series than TOS, and I am amazed how many complete non-trekkies know Picard, Worf, Data, the Borg… 2 is making it sound as if the series was a mee footnote in Trek’s history, but TNG was so much more than that….

No need to buy the Blu rays now that Netflix streams them. Glad I only bought Seasons 1 & 2.

Does anyone one this website actually like Star Trek at all? All everyone ever does is complain.

Let me clarify– I’m refering to the people that post comments on this website….

#2? Someone pee in your cornflakes?

The great thing about TNG was the fantastic lead actor. The other great thing about TNG, and this cannot be denied, was it reinvigorated the ST franchise. Without it there would be no DS9, Voy or Ent. (IMHO, DS9 was the best of the post TOS shows). And kept the franchise alive for quite some time. Changes to TNG…. The supporting cast needed to be better actors. Part of this is due to being compared to Steward, who had the acting chops and charisma to make the many weak episodes watchable. And another part of it was the fact that the characters they were playing were quite dull. Next, the Picard character was just too perfect. He needed to be more human. This is why First Contact was the best of the TNG features. Picard had to overcome a personal flaw. Again, it is a testament to Stewart that he made such a bland character watchable all those years. I know supporting characters are just that. But it sure would have been nice to get some interesting people on that ship rather than just elements from the original series given new names. That was where DS9 ran circles around TNG. The PEOPLE! The writing really needed to improve. I know that after 170 some odd episodes there will be dogs. There were plenty of dogs in TOS as well. But the ratio of good eps to bad ones in TNG was probably the worst of all the series. The bottom… Read more »

6: Funny you should say that. I have often felt TNG would have been a whole lot better if it had been set on board a Klingon ship!

8: I disagree. BD is still the highest quality out there. Streaming still bites. Too many stops to buffer, the controls are very delayed action and worst, no extras. The discs themselves solve ALL those problems. When the streaming technology improves you might have a point. Until then, having the physical media in your had rules.

CmdrR and Prodigal Son

“If you (because you’re a billionaire) remake TNG, please change its name…”

Agreed. As PS suggests, let’s call it Baldy and his band of boring misfits!

Great name.

I liked TNG. I loved it in fact and Im the biggest TOS homer there is. Im a Captain Kirk guy. But TNG was great.

I’ve watched bits and pieces here and there in recent years. I holds up to a degree. Its not riveting television. Not sure it would work exactly the same in today’s TV landscape.

If it was on Netflix or cable where it could be given time to find its legs and attract a loyal audience without the pressure of needing to be a top rated show, it would work though.

Stewart was, ofcourse, amazing. But I liked most of the cast. Spiner is a very good actor. And I thought Riker was a great counter point to Picard. Sure, he’s not Oscar-winner but he played his character well.

Troi got a lot better when they stopped trying to force her into stories. And especially once she got out of the stupid jump suit and into a uniform.

The worst actors/characters were Wesley ofcourse. He was better in later seasons when they werent forcing the kid genius concept down our throats. Its why Jake Sisko worked so much better. He was just a kid growing up in this amazing place. He didnt have to save the day, fly a star ship or be the smarted person around. just a kid.

And Geordi sucked.

@6 I agree Jonboc. I REALLY tried very hard to like TNG as much as TOS because I had seen TOS so many times I desperately wanted some NEW Trek. Technically speaking the cinematography was always the same for the most part, boring flat lighting, medium shots, and no depth of field or interesting angles. Mix that with extremely dull, uninspiring music and a beige bridge that looks like a Holiday Inn Lounge with lighting that feels like I am standing in a Walmart, and you have arrived! ;) At its worst TNG was truckloads of extraneous techno-babble spoken by derivative one dimensional characters who would explore their “feelings” in a simplistic sea of wishy washy narcissistic 1980’s politically correct sensibilities. (LOL) It definitely improved immensely as the series went on though with some truly great episodes like The Inner Light, Chain of Command, Family, All Good Things, Relics, Best of Both Worlds, and Yesterday’s Enterprise but for me it never truly escaped it’s own Berman-esque mediocrity. Absolutely love Patrick Stewart. Without him the show would be completely un-watchable as none of the other actors IMO ever measured up to his level of skill as an actor. I do think it’s great however that other people enjoy the show so much, and it did keep Trek going for a almost a decade which must be noted. At the end of the day I am glad the series was made, and First Contact was extremely well done, as good as any… Read more »
I think for the most part, TNG has held up pretty good. Obviously there are things that make it stand out as an older show but all shows have that – look at the cell phones on X-FIles or even House, MD and tell me they don’t stand out. As well, being on 4×3 tv, the layout is a little off compared to what we would do today but again, that isn’t a horrible thing. But TNG did a good job of making sure they didn’t let the styles of the time appear too much – no mullets or flock of seagulls hair, rarely see a goatee, etc. As well, things like the computer graphics used still work because they went for a very specific style and stuck with it so you don’t get a ton of shots like you would with a show like Babylon 5 where they might have been state of the art 20 years ago but today it looks horrible. I think that is the main thing people need to remember – you need to separate the limits of tv at that time from what they did. It was a 4×3 sd market at the time so you could only do so much but the blu–rays did show that all the work necessary was done, we just didn’t get to see it then but we do now. They tried to make the show somewhat ageless in design choices, makeup, costumes, etc and it still works today… Read more »

#2: You need help.

I still love watching TNG on BBC America every week when it comes on TV.

#16 Spockboy “Technically speaking the cinematography was always the same for the most part, boring flat lighting, medium shots, and no depth of field or interesting angles. Mix that with extremely dull, uninspiring music and a beige bridge that looks like a Holiday Inn Lounge with lighting that feels like I am standing in a Walmart, and you have arrived! ;)”

You’re so right. On the production end, it was rather paint-by-numbers television. I loved how, on TOS, the camera was always moving on the bridge. There were great dolly shots that really took advantage of that two-tier set. And you’re absolutely on the money about the lighting. It”s as if the artistry was left behind in favor or efficiency.

And don’t even get me started on the ridiculous insistence on having A-B stories. They had less time than TOS had to tell ONE storyline and yet TNG wanted to divide it into 2…the “b” story usually being very lame and totally expendable. More the pity that creative TOS veterans like DC Fontana and David Gerrold jumped ship…but I can’t blame them.

It was frustrating: TOS peaked with STIV:TVH. In 1987, I wanted a modern show that had lots of fun, action and a love of science that opens people’s minds the way TOS did. Instead, TNG was an extremist, self-righteous, communist polemic with a hatred of the individual, the different and unique, with arrogant characters who were willing to sacrifice billions of people (‘Homeland’) to their rigid collectivist ideals. The characters were stereotypes where TOS had archetypes.

The show was saved by Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner who elevated the boring patrician leader and the emotionally-stunted ‘bloke everyone is meant to laugh at’ into genuine characters by sheer force of will and acting talent.

As a TV show, it has little lasting worth compared with the 1960s show and its direct spin offs. In the long run, in the annals of TV history, TNG will be relegated to the same position as the 1980s Mission: Impossible TV show or The Munsters Today. It’ll linger for a while, but, when Trek is celebrating its centenary in 2066, the names Kirk, Spock and McCoy will be remembered while Picard, Riker and Wesley Crusher will be footnotes at best.

I rewatched all of ST:Voyager a couple of months ago. It has aged incredibly well. I could watch it today if it was a new show. Yes, there are a few bad episodes, but every TV series (not just Star Trek) has a few duds. I think Voyager has aged a lot better than TNG (especially the first couple of seasons of TNG).

Just started listening to this podcast, and I have to offer the following: According to David Gerrold, who (in one of his MissionLog interviews) addressed the issue of GR allegedly dictating “no conflict” amongst the Enterprise crew during the first two seasons of TNG, it was actually Gene’s attorney, Leonard Maizlish—a.k.a. “the evil lawyer”—who was responsible for the “no conflict” dictate. According to Gerrold and other members of the TNG production, Maizlish had been operating as somewhat of a Grima Wormtongue type, supplying GR with drugs that kept him less than entirely coherent, while issuing dictates and writs supposedly on GR’s behalf. And the “no-conflict” rule, according to Gerrold, was the brainchild of Maizlish more than, or rather than, of GR.

Looking forward to listening to the rest of the podcast later tonight!

Every now and then I’ll come across an episode of TNG on TV and will stop to watch. Most of the time, I quickly lose interest and move on to something else. There were a few memorable episodes but too often the show was compromised any of a number of issues: bad acting, over the top political correctness, too much reliance on techno-babble, really manipulative plots, and – especially in the later seasons – way too much self reverence. The TNG movies are even worse and for the most part unwatchable. It has not aged well at all for me.

Spockboy nailed it for me. I enjoyed TNG when it was first run but I rarely have watched it since. It’s just too boring for me, except for maybe 6 or 7 episodes. I still find myself watching TOS more than any of the others. Sure it’s dated, but at least they aren’t nearly as boring.
First Contact is a good movie, but the rest of the TNG films were garbage.

Cygnus –

Yeah he said something very similar when I interviewed him last year:

http://trekmovie.com/2014/09/12/exclusive-david-gerrold-talks-frankly-about-tng-conflicts-with-roddenberry-berman-jj-trek-more/

Maizlish seemed like a truly vile human being. That said, I wouldn’t hang all of the blame on him. Gene had developed a very pacifist mindset during the 70’s, when he was constantly being lauded as a visionary. TNG is the result of Gene’s more “evolved” worldview, for better or worse.

Another press conference clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWRyaC-v7QE

LLAP

17 – Oh, the first few seasons are _tremendously_ latter-80s in colour palettes (plums, taupes, beiges, teals), textures (ruched fabrics a go go), hairstyles (TONS of mullets! They’re really hard to miss, plus crimping, highlighting, you name it…), fashionably ripped clothing a la Kenzo, New Romantic looks not entirely un-Spandau Ballet during their early years. I mean, if you don’t believe me, check out the amazingly hilarious Tumblr, Fashion It So (http://sttngfashion.tumblr.com).

I’d agree with many that most characters were written flatly and there was little chance for growth and interaction – when you have large ensembles it’s always a risk. Levar Burton got the short end of the stick, for sure. Most of the TOS crew were stage actors first and while stagey-ness brings along a tendency to play too “big” for the camera, it lent strength to many subtle moments. The TNG crew came from TV and soaps, mostly, and it shows.

As a TOS fan, I remember approaching TNG with uncertainty. Why not just bring an extension or spin-off of the TOS movies to TV? Alas.

I liked TNG..mostly. Some were cringeworthy…some were great. If you redid TNG, you’d need two things in my book: 1. Make the ship look less like a flying Marriott and more like a deep space exploration vessel. 2. Get rid of this false “we all get along and never disagree” nonsense and bring back the core of ANY good dramatic series: DRAMA! Rooted in authentic conflict. But we had that purposely washed out in TNG, and it often made it as bland as the setpieces.

I thought TNG’s finale was grand and gracious, and many TNG eps are superb. But these two elements kept it, for me, from reaching its full potential.

And the award for the most ridiculous statement in this thread goes to:

“TNG will be relegated to the same position as the 1980s Mission: Impossible TV show or The Munsters Today.”

Bravo!

The funny thing with Star Trek is I wouldn’t be surprise if the least famous Star Trek (DS9, Voyager, Enterprise) hold up better to the general public than the famous one. Deep Space Nine, Voyager, and Enterprise had internal conflict, action, story arc.

Honestly, guys, I genuinely do not understand all the hate. TNG is one of my favorite TV shows of all time, bar-none. It dealt with complex, morally grey issues and had incredibly endearing characters with loads of amazing sci-fi concepts (two-dimensional species! Modular operating systems! Dyson Spheres! cybernetic hiveminds!) not to mention the occasional exploration into gender dynamics (TOS would never have attempted even making a genderless species, let alone allow crewmen to wear dresses). On top of it all the art direction was fantastic — those spacecraft designs are amazing, and yes, as 1980s as the sets are, I’d still love to live and work on the Enterprise D. On top of it all, the much-aligned technobabble actually served a purpose — if you really listen to it a lot of the time there’s a coherency — both in terms of the show’s internal logic and to legitimate scientific concepts. It’s really fascinating writing, and I always found it truly fun to compare and contrast to the tech manual released at around the same time. It made the universe seem that much more fleshed-out. With regards to the D itself, it was designed very deliberately to exude a degree of comfort — not only was it an exploration/diplomatic vessel with families living on board, but it was a very distinct contrast against the clunkier, more tactile spacecraft designs of the past and present. It’s a brave, audacious move that no other series would take. If anything I wish more… Read more »

A lof of you have completely missed my point. This site is called Trek”MOVIE”.com, and hence I don’t get the constant barrage of TNG stuff here. I mean a little bit is OK, but I definitely get the sense that most of the staff now running this site both don’t like the new movie, and prefer TNG to TOS.

If that’s the case, then this site is misleading the public and fans by still calling itself Trek”MOVIE”.com.

You are deluding yourself. 50 years from now, TNG will be largely forgotten, but the TOS will still be iconic, and will probably been it’s fourth incarnation.

BTW, how’d that TNG movie franchise work out?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5. Damion Mac – October 1, 2015

@the posters above

“”Star Trek: The Next Generation” had the highest ratings of any “Star Trek” that had ever existed. It is arguably the most sucessful iteration of Trek. If it were not for TNG’s overall success, DS9 and Voyager would not have existed.

While it is starting to age, similar to TOS, TNG seems to maintain a sense of post modernism.

@32

Wonderful explanation, D.V………………….you have a very nice writing style.

Are you a professional writer?

If not, you should be…

That’s just silly. Blu-Ray HD picture quality blows away compressed Netflix HD picture quality. Fact.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
8. Driver – October 1, 2015
No need to buy the Blu rays now that Netflix streams them. Glad I only bought Seasons 1 & 2.

@ Harry Ballz

Agreed. If only TNG had had writers half as good as D.V.

Regarding Dr. Polaski, in another MissionLog interview, Marina Sirtis recalls that Diana Muldaur remarked during the season that she was on TNG (Season 2) that she could tell that she would only be on the show for one season. Sirtis doesn’t elaborate on how Muldaur knew this, or suspected this, but it’s plausible that Muldaur had apprehended the temporal limitation of her employment by picking up on various cues from the producers. The point being that Muldaur having been written as a somewhat prickly, “unlikable,” character could well have been intentional. Maybe the producers planned or hoped to get Gates MacFadden back in the future, for example. Or, maybe the producers wanted to introduce a sort of “foil” character into the overly serene Enterprise social dynamic. Or, maybe some combination of reasons. And the whole reason for Gates MacFadden leaving the show is another bit of controversy. . . .

26. Brian Drew – October 1, 2015

Well, if Gerrold says that the “no conflict” dictate came from Maizlish, and nobody else in the production disputes that, don’t we have to take Gerrold’s word for it?

With due regard to what you said about GR’s pacifism, it could have been that GR, at some point, said something to Maizlish about the Enterprise crew not having “too much” or a certain incident of conflict, because it was the future and they were beyond it—perhaps in regard to a particular scene, story idea or episode—and Maizlish boneheadedly turned that into an absolute prohibition against conflict per se amongst the Enterprise crew.

Regarding the question of whether TNG holds up today… For me it holds up remarkably well. TNG remains my favorite of all the Trek series, and I’m honestly shocked whenever I see people who are big TOS fans say that they have no use for TNG, which is so evidently modeled after the TOS formula—examining relevant social, philosophic and scientific issues, typically involving a thematic statement (moral/message) of some kind, often with the crew in jeopardy and having to figure a way out of danger or dilemma. But TNG went so much further than TOS with its concepts. Morally ambiguous episodes like, “The Defector,” for example are much more intellectually and dramatically sophisticated than anything that TOS ever did. And rightly so, given the 20 years hence that TNG had to grow and learn from, not only TOS, but from dramatic technique and culture in general. TNG reminds me of an essay by German playwright Berthold Brecht in which he outlines his vision for “Epic Theatre,” which differs from the traditional theatre of that time in how it proposes to engage the audience. Traditional theatre, says Brecht, basically panders to the audience’s emotions and preconceived beliefs, taking them along for a ride—just entertaining them (sound familiar?). Epic theatre, Brecht proposed, would challenge the audience, make them think, force them to take a position about an argument presented on stage. Epic theatre would not be merely “culinary” (i.e. easy to consume and requiring no active involvement), promised Brecht. And that is… Read more »

P.S. The above-referenced essay by Berthold Brecht is, The Modern Theatre is the Epic Theatre, which he published in 1930.

# 38. Cygnus-X1 – October 2, 2015 ” Well, if Gerrold says that the “no conflict” dictate came from Maizlish, and nobody else in the production disputes that, don’t we have to take Gerrold’s word for it?” — Cygnus-X1 If you ignore Gene’s other prior works which preceded it, indeed, but in between STAR TREKS he put the bulk of his efforts mightily into a launch of GENESIS II as a series. So much so that he lost control of it just as he succeeded in getting it on a series launch track that became PLANET EARTH. In that journey we see him develop the concept of the PAX unit which he obviously carried over to TNG. While I enjoyed TNG, I always clearly had the sense that it was obviously a hybrid cross between his earlier STAR TREK success and what he regarded as the more advanced concepts that he developed in THE QUESTOR TAPES and GENESIS II. It never really set well with me as the “ideal” next version of STAR TREK. I was happy to have it as a “Roddenberry’s back on TV product”, but as STAR TREK it left me wanting. My hope during its run was that it would do well enough to eventually get a STAR TREK series on the air that would be able to tell stories more along the lines of what the best of the original and its movie sequels writing lead me to believe was possible. I found that reward… Read more »

Honestly I don’t think TNG has aged well at all. We were all so starved for any scifi on television back in ’87, that we were willing to take anything, especially a new version of Trek. And I remained an ardent fan through it’s entire run. But once I started rewatching them a few years later (and after seeing how both DS9 and Voyager got better and better after rocky starts), I realized just how many really lousy episodes there were of TNG.

There were just so many episodes about the misunderstood alien who turned out to be nice, and way too many kid-centric episodes. I came to the conclusion that there were really only about 5 or 6 great episodes, about 15-20 really good ones, and most of the rest ranged between bad and god-awful.

Plus so many of the characters were so under-developed. Picard and Data were the only strong characters, and Worf’s character wasn’t truly developed until he went over to DS9. Troi, Beverly, and Geordi never developed into interesting characters, and Riker’s character was totally unrealistic and poorly acted from season one through the end.

It pains me to say it, but TNG was by far the worst of all the Trek series.

Where I get internet, the streaming quality of Netflix HD is very, very good, with no dropouts using CAT 6 cable. There is scant difference between Blu ray and Netflix HD. You can talk to the hand about components. My gear is high quality.

@ Driver

Nope. Netflix uses compression to get the file size of the download down to about 1/10th the size of a Blu-Ray disc. So you are getting a “fake” 1080P picture that looks pretty good, but it nowhere close to Blu-ray. Play each and look at the pixels up close and you will see a major difference. (File) SIZE MATTERS.

And audio, LOL, you certainly aren’t getting anything close to uncompressed DTS Master audio on your streaming set-up. Let’s be honest, Netflix streaming audio kind of stinks.

This explains a lot.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
41. Cygnus-X1 – October 2, 2015
P.S. The above-referenced essay by Berthold Brecht is, The Modern Theatre is the Epic Theatre, which he published in 1930.

42. Disinvited – October 2, 2015

…in between STAR TREKS he put the bulk of his efforts mightily into a launch of GENESIS II as a series. So much so that he lost control of it just as he succeeded in getting it on a series launch track that became PLANET EARTH. In that journey we see him develop the concept of the PAX unit which he obviously carried over to TNG.

You’re saying that GENESIS II included a premise of no conflict amongst the crew? (I am totally unfamiliar with GENESIS II.)

but as STAR TREK it left me wanting. My hope during its run was that it would do well enough to eventually get a STAR TREK series on the air that would be able to tell stories more along the lines of what the best of the original and its movie sequels writing lead me to believe was possible. I found that reward in STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE NINE.

I can understand if the most important attribute in a TV show is serial character-development that you’d prefer DS9 to TNG. But, I don’t understand how you found TNG lacking in stories along the lines of the best of TOS and the TOS movies. The TNG basically used TOS as a template and then expanded upon it. Where is the disparity for you?

I thought to myself,,,,
Thank God this was in syndication ,
because if it had been like the original , (a network broadcast)
It would have been cancelled during it’s first year.

Somewhere along the 21 years, Between 1966 and 1987…
Gene Roddenberry either forgot what producing inspiring and motivational Science Fiction was all about, OR..
Gene Coon (who died in the early 70’s)
Deserved a lot more credit for what he did on the original series.
Because the first 2 years of T.N.G. were boring and dull,,,
They may have had a tremendous budget compared to the original series,,,,
But as a viewer, you sure did not see it on the Television screen.
No action and other than Data with Yar, very little sex either. lol

Also out of seven years of episodes,,, Only a handful stood out or were even memorable.
if one wants to be honest as well as Non biased.
The Next Generation also helped lead Star Trek to becoming
over saturated.
Because before T.N.G., D.S.9. Voyager as well as Enterprise,
There was only 79 Episodes and 4 Movies.
With that being said, I so miss the days when a New Star Trek Movie was rare as well as something that we looked forward too.

There is no way I would have forked over $100+ for a season set when they first came out nor even now when the sets are around $30. TNG episodes deserve one, maybe two more views other than the original broadcast to satisfy me so again no reason to buy unlike TOS which I can watch many eps over and over. Same goes for the spin offs, one or two times and I’ve had it. I can also watch the films over and over so there is reason to buy the Blu rays. And I only watch streaming on my LED 55″, not on some pitiful i-whatever.

#38: About the Gates McFadden / Diana Muldaur story…

During individual debriefings with each of the actors of the end of Season One, Gates was told that Crusher and Picard would be spun away from each other so that each character could explore romantic relationships with outside characters as a way to broaden the number of stories that could be told. Gates did not agree with this development and made it clear she was unwilling to go this direction with her character. So, she was summarily fired.

The remainder of the cast was extremely angry over Gates; firing, so when Diana arrived as her replacement, the entire cast (yes, *everyone*) took it out on her and treated Diana horribly, to the point she would often leave the set in tears.

If the entire cast is mean to you and tells you constantly that you’re not wanted there, it’s not a surprise that you would conclude that your days were numbered.

Once Michael Piller arrived in Season Three, the first thing he did was re-hire Gates. Sympathetic to the cast’s point of view on the original firing, the character of Pulaski wasn’t even acknowledged upon Crusher’s return.

I was told this story back in 1997 by a very good source.

wpDiscuz
Advertisment ad adsense adlogger