Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Star Trek - The Next Generation - from a non trekkie's perspective

Options
  • 04-05-2009 3:18am
    #1
    abouttobebanned
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,943 ✭✭✭


    Okay so I've never seen any of the start trek films, I know sweet FA about all the shows, but I did want to say this...(as pointless as it is)

    I used to, occasionally, watch The Next Generation - or TNG as you must surely call it - when it was on SKY 1 back in the day (between 5 and 6). Back in my school days there was notoriously never anything good on between 5 and 6 and SKY filled the gap with different things like, Different Strokes, Quantum Leap, and many others which I'm sure you can think of at a more reasonable hour of the day. Anyway...

    So I often sat down to watch Star Trek...and two main things struck me....

    1. Man were they able to tell a story. You really didn't have to know diddly squat about any of the characters to get into it, just for that hour.

    2. At around 5:52, we'd be deep into the plot and all I'd be thinking would be, "hold on a second here...there's no way that they can resolve this story in the next 5 minutes...I mean there's too much that has to happen!" But resolve it they always did...and it rarely seemed rushed.

    So, TNG, for me, was very non-trekkie-friendly and I think that was the key to its success.

    And that's all I have to say about that.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    TNG is good Trek. Very probably the best.

    I guess the difference between a 'trekkie' and a 'non-trekkie' is that the former will watch any old ****e with the word Trek in it... but it'd be difficult for anyone to deny that TNG was a good show.


  • Options
    #3
    User45701
    Registered Users Posts: 6,905 ✭✭✭User45701


    i thought a trekie was anyone who watched episodes several times compared to the casual sci viewer who is quite happy to watch a episode once or twice.


  • Options
    #4
    Irishtrekkie
    Registered Users Posts: 330 ✭✭Irishtrekkie


    casual sci fi viewer ??


    god cant remember the last time i say any good sci fi on the t.v. that was not called star trek , oh well there was battlestar galatica .........:eek: no wait that was s**t.


  • Options
    #5
    L31mr0d
    Registered Users Posts: 8,067 ✭✭✭L31mr0d


    Irishtrekkie wrote: »
    oh well there was battlestar galatica .........:eek: no wait that was s**t.

    True... That!

    never understand the hype around BSG, bores me to tears.

    TNG is actually amazing. I mean I watch a few other shows now, and they are cutting corners to save on budget or the writing in a few of them is lacking, but TNG managed to be consistently good. Most people who used to watch it on and off like the OP are surprised to hear it's only 7 seasons long. It got aired on repeat for so many years that it made it seem like they where making TNG for well over a decade.

    I mean you go back to the 1987 episode "Encounter at Farpoint", and it holds up imo to even the likes of Heroes or BSG now and it's 20 years later.


  • Options
    #6
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    L31mr0d wrote: »
    True... That!

    never understand the hype around BSG, bores me to tears.

    TNG is actually amazing. I mean I watch a few other shows now, and they are cutting corners to save on budget or the writing in a few of them is lacking, but TNG managed to be consistently good. Most people who used to watch it on and off like the OP are surprised to hear it's only 7 seasons long. It got aired on repeat for so many years that it made it seem like they where making TNG for well over a decade.

    I mean you go back to the 1987 episode "Encounter at Farpoint", and it holds up imo to even the likes of Heroes or BSG now and it's 20 years later.

    Qft. Despite what people say about it being dated I can't see the validity of that point of view at all. Well ok, some of the fx looks a bit cheesy in places but for the most part and particularly from season 3 onwards the FX holds up well. I agree 100% on BSG.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Goodshape
    Registered Users Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Um, BSG was fraking awesome.


    That is all.


  • Options
    #8
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,732 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    Goodshape wrote: »
    Um, BSG was fraking awesome.


    That is all.

    +1.

    TNG suffered from the same problem that all the other iterations (barring DS9) suffered from: the incessant need to maintain the status quo.

    In the space of seven twenty-odd episode-seasons, here's the major changes:

    Wesley piloted the ship, then left.
    Crusher left for a season, then came back.
    Deanna got a uniform.
    Geordie became chief engineer.
    Worf became chief of security and tactical officer.

    Can't think of any other permanent changes.
    (You could argue that Picard was cursed with a permanent psionic link to the Borg (see First Contact). But then that was never discussed in the episode I, Hugh.)

    I don't believe there should be changes introduced purely for entertainment value...wait, yes I do. I enjoy seeing characters persevere through difficult times and come out weaker/stronger. It makes the universe more believable and the characters more relateable. I mean, c'mon, Picard breaks down cying in front of his stern French brother after his Borgification...then that's it.

    Adama and co punched, shot and roared their way through countless struggles. Yes it's a much darker show---the darkness seldom invaded Star Trek---but also it accepted and used the fact that people change over time, and sometimes not for the better.

    TNG had its good moments, but like every other iteration, it just seemed to stroll along unhindered by such things as unexpected twists and interesting character arcs.

    DS9 is an exception but it too had many filler episodes, and frankly its attempt to make us thing that Dukat with a Bajoran nose-ridge was unrecognizable to one of his greatest enemies (Kai Opaka I think, or Kai Winn?) ruined any chances of its climax carrying any emotional weight. however it dared to carry arcs over episode and entire seasons, and who was its showrunner?

    A pre-BSG Ronald D Moore.


  • Options
    #9
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,437 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    You missed the biggest one. Tasha Yar's death.

    But I agree , there was never much suspense that things would be changed by the end of the episode. But with DS9 you were never sure what might be changed.


  • Options
    #10
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,732 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    jhegarty wrote: »
    You missed the biggest one. Tasha Yar's death.

    I kinda didn't;)...that's how Worf got the promotion
    But I agree , there was never much suspense that things would be changed by the end of the episode. But with DS9 you were never sure what might be changed.

    Yesterday's Enterprise is a perfect example. Any quantum screwups are obviously going to be rectified by the episode's close. It was just a question of how. Same with All Good Things..., the finale. although that had a lot of ingenuity and lateral thinking so I'll let that one slide. Tapestry, Best of Both Worlds... all of them represented a huge shake-up in the setup of the show, and all were quikcly reversed or forgotten by end of the episode (or double-episode, whatever the case may be.)

    With DS9, the same applied until that Season Three episode where a Dominion ship slammed into a Galaxy class starship, shredding her to pieces. From that moment on, all bets were off.

    Best shake-up in DS9 was when Bashir turned out to have been a Dominion mole, and the real Bashir was on a prison planet, still in the older uniform, having been replaced several episodes previously. Also, the episode where he turned out to have been genetically engineered---although I always thought they could have put that to better use. Just seemed an excuse for a guest star in Robert Picardo.


  • Options
    #11
    L31mr0d
    Registered Users Posts: 8,067 ✭✭✭L31mr0d


    Klingon Hamlet wrote: »
    TNG suffered from the same problem that all the other iterations (barring DS9) suffered from: the incessant need to maintain the status quo.

    You say that like its a bad thing? A lot of people loved the show for this very reason. Take the X-Files, another favourite show of mine, it had pretty much the same format, a lot of the episodes where self contained, with little overall development of the underlying main story, and I think it was better for it.

    Star Trek: TNG was the same, there where some ongoing story arcs... Data for example had a few, Q, Picard not only had his Borg arc but also the effects from the episode "The inner light" and "Chain of command". There was Worfs backstory... heck every main character had there story developed over multiple episodes. Yes they didn't irreversibly screw up the timeline, but a full reset didn't happen either at the end of each episode. Imho, it didn't suffer because of its format, it excelled because of it, and many would agree.

    Frankly, I am the opposite, I find recent shows suffer irrevocably because they are tied so strictly to a linear progression and maintaining their status quo, having to follow on relentlessly from where the previous episode ended.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    nyarlothothep
    Registered Users Posts: 5,176 ✭✭✭nyarlothothep


    Also if there is one thing that I like about TNG its the fact that the emotion isn't in your face. I thought Picards breakdown scene was perfect, he wasn't someone given to emotional displays so the fact that we only see hints of the trauma for example in I Borg is much cooler imo. I dunno, I prefer stories where the characters don't continuously talk about their emotions/how messed up they are. It kind of relates to the show, don't tell rule.


  • Options
    #13
    Derek Coleman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 325 ✭✭Derek Coleman


    Deep Space Nine after season 3 was amazing. The whole Dominion war was played out perfectly. It grew slowly into a full scale encounter. Loved it and Loved the ending.

    The Next Generation after season 3 was amazing too in a different way. Very likeable characters. And the finale for TNG was brilliant. I get goose bumps watching Picard sit down at the table to play cards with his crew in the end.

    Star Trek is fun. Its not Science fact its Science fiction. I sometimes laugh to myself at plot holes and reset buttons in episodes but without Star Trek in my life I would have had nothing to watch after school at 5 o'clock or nothing to fall asleep to at 11 when they showed it again.

    I understand criticism of Star Trek from fans because its good discussion but Star Trek for me is, and always will be, FUN tv.


  • Options
    #14
    monosharp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,981 ✭✭✭monosharp


    Klingon Hamlet wrote: »
    +1.

    TNG suffered from the same problem that all the other iterations (barring DS9) suffered from: the incessant need to maintain the status quo.

    Yeah but DS9 was pretty crap. Got going half-way through, then took a huge dive into crapiness at the end.

    TNG kept going up and finished with a bang. Jesus I want to watch "All good things" now again.

    And yes BSG was awesome ... mostly.


  • Options
    #15
    thelordofcheese
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,368 ✭✭✭thelordofcheese


    monosharp wrote: »
    Yeah but DS9 was pretty crap. Got going half-way through, then took a huge dive into crapiness at the end.

    TNG kept going up and finished with a bang. Jesus I want to watch "All good things" now again.

    I think you have DS9 and TNG mixed up. Badly.


  • Options
    #16
    Random
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,082 ✭✭✭✭Random


    DS9 can only be compared to TNG in that they are both trek. I think otherwise they're very different shows. DS9 seems darker or something.

    Both shows great in their own ways.


  • Options
    #17
    Spon Farmer
    Registered Users Posts: 4,194 ✭✭✭Spon Farmer


    Goodshape wrote: »
    TNG is good Trek. Very probably the best.

    I guess the difference between a 'trekkie' and a 'non-trekkie' is that the former will watch any old ****e with the word Trek in it... but it'd be difficult for anyone to deny that TNG was a good show.

    it's not difficult for me.

    TNG had some very good episodes - Q Who?, Best of Both World's, Darmok, etc. - and I followed all the way through for it's seven years run, but watching All Good Thing's it's clear that the characters are exactly the same as when the show started. the crew all perfect examples of Starfleet. and for me the vast majority of episodes hold do not hold up to repeat viewing. rarely were any of the characters lives any different at an episodes end that it was at the beginning.

    DS9 on the other hand had the right mix of action and drama. on-going story arcs. imperfect people struggling with life on the Federation's border and learning to work as a crew as the series progreesed, becoming a family by it's conclusion in a galaxy irreversibly changed by war. they had a freakin' war. had it bad points (Kira and Odo hooking up) but the good points far outweighed them. btw, DS9 was all about Morn.

    And as for the Original - how can anybody not love it. it's the best.


  • Options
    #18
    tj-music.com
    Closed Accounts Posts: 981 ✭✭✭tj-music.com


    In retrospect, it has always been the case that all the different shows got better with time, because the first couple of seasons the characters had to be developed and that wasn't always done properly.

    From Season 3 right through to the end TNG was superb and apart from maybe "Nemesis" the films were also well made and carried their characters and story well.


  • Options
    #19
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,732 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    tj-music.com wrote: »
    In retrospect, it has always been the case that all the different shows got better with time, because the first couple of seasons the characters had to be developed and that wasn't always done properly.

    I agree, they weren't, but they should have been. Look at Firefly: that successfully set up a team of very different characters, AND the universe they float about in, within a 100 minute ilot. TNG took 3 seasons to get going properly.
    tj-music.com wrote: »
    From Season 3 right through to the end TNG was superb and apart from maybe "Nemesis" the films were also well made and carried their characters and story well.

    Ahem:oI think you forgot Insurrection. Probably best off. That. Was. Bad. (Picard stopped time with his mind? Right...OK...let's make that movie!)


  • Options
    #20
    Rawr
    Registered Users Posts: 3,766 ✭✭✭Rawr


    Klingon Hamlet wrote: »
    Ahem:oI think you forgot Insurrection. Probably best off. That. Was. Bad. (Picard stopped time with his mind? Right...OK...let's make that movie!)

    I feel that Insurrection was pretty much little more than a left over two-parter from TNG, that somehow became the movie. It was very underwhelming, to say the very least about it. It should have been a straight-to-tv special, as it really didn't feel like it deserved to be on the big screen.

    The So'na came across as a lazy excuse for a villain, whose only distinguishing qualities appear to be skin-grafts and being nasty.


Advertisement