It’s so bizarre to read this in the present, knowing how incredible TNG was, but I get it - the original crew WAS Star Trek to them.
The dedicated fans revived this series in syndication, well after it had gone off the air in 1969, and felt attached to the characters that they had obsessed over between then and the 1980s. Like modern fans, they thought that departure from what they knew would ruin it.
I wish I could go back in time and tell them that TNG is going to rock.
“unknown British Shakespearian actor…” Wow, I never thought I’d hear Patrick Stewart described that way.
I think he was just an extra in the movie Excalibur before TNG, outside of stage.
Edit: “”““extra””“” in extra quotes forgive me it’s been over a decade since I saw the movie.
How dare you disrespect Gurney Halleck like that?
His boss was a captain too
deleted by creator
lol he wasn’t an extra… he had a hugely important role… he was Guenevere’s father for crying out loud, they fought a huge battle at his castle and everything… he tries to draw the freaking sword itself!!
edit: i’m sorry i love that film a little too much
Wasn’t he also in the original version of Dune?
yeah and he’s awesome
deleted by creator
The picture in the article is him as Gurney in Dune.
Oh shit you’re right. Never saw that one though.
You are missing out. I love that movie. People call it a train wreck and tbh it kinda of is, but for me, the lynch’s weirdness jibes perfectly with the world that Herbert eventually creates. Tonally it felt right.
I never understood the hate
He was in the original Dune too.
He was great as Sejanus in I, Claudius.
He was in I, Claudius. He’d been in stuff.
He wasn’t well- known, but had had a bunch of assorted roles on TV and movies.
Shlock shock journalism to sell issues.
TNG > OG series any day, everyday.
It took me a long time to reach this conclusion. I love TOS, and the characters are cultural icons, but when I want to fanboy over the whole “philosophy” of Star Trek, I’m thinking of TNG every single time.
I’ll probably get wrecked in here for saying this,but I never liked TOS. It’s so campy and hokey. Even the movies with the original cast don’t interest me all that much. I respect them for paving the way for TNG, but I’ll never choose TOS over TNG.
TOS is fun to watch in an ironic, cult classic, campy, laughing-at-it-not-with-it way. TNG was the first actually good star trek.
deleted by creator
That’s actually why can rewatch TOS endlessly but TNG only occasionally. TOS is that light popcorn fare that’s entertaining but you don’t take very seriously. TNG is serious sci-fi that challenges the audience often with very difficult subject matter. The latter is objectively the better show but if I’m looking for something to throw on for casual fun, for me it’s TOS all the way.
Same, though there’s one i can really watch endlessly: TAS. Giant Spock melting minds with normal Spock always gets me.
This is how I am too. TOS feels like a lesser commitment to watching something, so it winds up being easier to throw on casually.
I have never watched TOS, but I have watched all the TOS movies and I am fond of them.
I wouldn’t say they are related at all, at least in terms of how the TV comes off vs the movies even though the cast is the same. TOS TV show is not too dissimilar to the old school Batman show in it’s corniness. Not to that level of silliness, but they were contemporaries of each other when they aired on TV in the late 60s.
@Hazdaz @BeigeAgenda the hippie vibe was part of the general campy tone those days - see The Man from U. N. C. L. E., Rowan and Martin’s Laugh In, That Was The Week That Was, or The Wild Wild West for other variations on that theme. Hi-tech, Steampunk, SciFi, variety, news spoofs - all had similar tone
Oh I get that was the tone of shows back then. Get Smart was another one. It’s just not my cup of tea for the most part.
Of course the irony is that I think shows (especially movies) these days are too serious and I almost wish they were a little more fun and playful like they were back in the 60s/70s. Just as long as they don’t go too silly.
I always barely get through TOS’ third season, it leaned too much into the psychedelic feel of the era.
@kamenlady big Yes. “Come now, to Eden, oh, brother” indeed. Just a tad too much Tim Leary.
@BeigeAgenda @Hazdaz
I’m old enough that there was only one Trek when I started. My take on a recent rewatch: https://rdvlivefromtokyo.blogspot.com/2021/09/ranking-star-trek-original-series.html?m=1This is a fantastic write-up.
This is what my brain is hoping for (and never gets) any time one of those click-bait articles tries to reel me in with a title that sounds similar.
@The_Picard_Maneuver thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
I agree. TOS has some interesting characters and fun moments, but I just can’t get into like I get into TNG. TNG is a series I can watch start to finish and all the movies and then start right over and watch it all again. TOS is one I might re-watch every 5+ years to refresh my memory, but I’ll put it on exclusively while I’m doing something else so I don’t waste my attention. My Dad loves TOS and TNG, and regularly references TOS, expecting me to remember episode names and whole plot lines. Oops.
I tried to go back and watch it as part of a kind of personal nerd pilgrimage. I just couldn’t get through it to save my life. Then I hit the beginning of TNG and was shocked, that was not what I remembered at all from all the reruns I saw growing up. I’m honestly still kind of shocked it lasted long enough to grow the beard.
I really think that can be said for a lot of shows. First few episodes, and sometimes the first few seasons don’t hit like the later ones. Simpsons, Seinfeld, TNG, Arrested Development and a lot of other shows were constantly on the cusp of getting canceled until they got their audience and the writers hit their stride with the story.
It happens so much to shows that we know ended up turning out good, that it always makes me wonder how many shows were canceled a few episodes or maybe a season or two sooner than they should have.
That is very well said. Tng embodies the philosophy of start trek better.
Unfair advantage, TNG has Picard.
Picard is definitely the top card there, but seriously the rest of the cast was damn good too.
Had a rather large crush on Beverly and Troy. Hubba hubba
mos def
I actually don’t think he had a role in TNG.
He may have been credited under his birth name Dante Smith… or his new name Yasiin Bey. In any case he’s most definitely Mos Def.
Star Trek: Picard has Picard too…
Unfortunately, it also has hubris.
Season one of TNG was compared to TOS and TNG didn’t fare too well early on. The Naked Now? A copy of The Naked Time. Data trying to be human was compared to Spock. LaForge wasn’t like Scotty. Picard was stuck up and by the book compared to Kirk rushing into battle and brawling with aliens with his bare hands.
It wasn’t until the show developed into its own thing that it became great.
Laforge wasn’t the engineer season one, right?
Correct, he was a helmsman
unpopular opinion: the first 3 seasons of tng were the best
Ooh, that’s a spicy take. I like it.
I love the first two seasons for their episodic adventure structure. But I also greatly appreciate the character driven structure of seasons 3+ and I definitely think the aesthetic changes for s3 were an unadulterated improvement.
It’s also funny that the article suggests that Laforge is the new Spock, and not obviously Data.
Yeah, the author was pretty obviously decided on his position and accuracy was an afterthought. But if you check his name, you’ll realize he makes a mean spicy chicken sandwich fwiw
I just noticed that he also spelled Riker as “Ryker”
That one actually isn’t a mistake. His last name was spelled “Ryker” when they were developing the show.
https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/William_T._Riker#Character_development
Ah, I wondered! They were clearly thinking that the Y makes it more science fictiony.
If you read the initial material, Data is drastically different. There is no explicit mention of being unemotional, just that he tends to speak more formally. He’s supposed to be more like the Ilia probe than Spock.
Worf didn’t exist at first, so Geordi the teacher with bionic vision would be the most “other” character. If they’d seen any of the early press material for Phase II, Spock’s replacement there was a very junior officer.
Wow, could you imagine the show without Worf? It just wouldn’t feel right.
The idea was that the Klingons had joined the Federation and we’d see Klingon Starfleet personnel in the background. When they did add Worf, he was to be more frequently Data’s relief than Yar’s.
I never got into original series (and I existed before TNG) but something about TNG clicked.
Picard was a man of culture, not some Macho man to sleep with aliens of different colours.
Riker really came into his own as a second and had a different personality and perspective that added to the show
Data explored the concepts of AI and sentience and that mankind could create a new being (The measure of a man episode).
Jordi Laforge was inspiring that people with disabilities could be important and high ranking and overcome those challenges.
Sure, OS has its charm with fake Scottish man and Sulu and the radical idea not all Russians were insane. But I mean, Bones was just such a cliche (dammit Jim) and never really grew on me the way I’m sure he did the generation that loved John Wayne.
Yeah, what was revolutionary in the 1960s (humans of all nationalities working together) wouldn’t have been enough in 1987, but I appreciate that it set the groundwork for the series as a whole.
The acting in TOS is over the top and often silly, but I try to watch it as a product of its time - audiences didn’t really want their shows to have an edge or get deeply philosophical back then, so Roddenberry and team had to sneak that type of stuff in where they could. I have a soft spot for TOS and the campy characters and still think it’s a fun lighthearted watch.
I mean let’s be real here they had every right to be concerned. TNG had serious problems in the beginning and had some pretty big flaws even as the show got going. Off the top of my head
- The first few episodes (besides Q) were straight trash. Even if you take out the ample racism and sexism, they still kinda suck
- Worf didn’t become a thing until Yar died. He was just kinda there. Also his hair looked ridiculous
- Riker was half as sexy in terms of looks and a quarter as sexy in terms of personality
- Picard was a dick. Not firm but fair. A straight up dick.
- They straight up got rid of crusher for a season
- The Ferengi were awful. Not like in a “lol what shenanigans is Quark up to now” but in a “TOS Gorn” way
I’m watching TNG now with someone who’s never seen it before, and that’s making me ‘see’ the show with fresh eyes. The first few episodes are so hard to get through. Some are straight up cringey. Many remember Code of Honor and Last Outpost as being horrible, but Naked Now is awful in its own way. Don’t get me wrong: TNG goes on to be an excellent, culture-defining show. When people talk about how good it is, they’re probably thinking about Measure of a Man, Inner Light, Darmok, and Best of Both Worlds.
Let me add that DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise got to build on the risks that TNG took. Those shows were more consistently good at their starts.
Hey Naked Now has Data laying android pipe and therefore is fully functional in terms of canon.
Jokes aside, it’s a great point. It adds even more meaning to Data’s evident attachment to Tasha later on.
and tryina get busy with the borg queen a decade later
Do you think the structured Soong’s character around the idea that he’d 100 percent be the type of guy to ensure Data had a fully functioning Penis?
Honestly from what we know of the Soong’s they probably almost never get laid so they 100% would try to make their androids studs in the bedroom.
The Naked Now was a bizarre choice for such an early episode. It’s the very first one after the premiere, and it’s based on the crew acting out of character – before the audience has had time to learn what their personalities are supposed to be.
deleted by creator
Completely irrelevant to the topic, but my personal head canon is that Janeway admired Worf’s S1 Hair and copied it when she was given Voyager to command.
She definitely wore it better.
Riker was half as sexy in terms of looks and a quarter as sexy in terms of personality
Without any other context, you could easily assume that Riker’s beard is what really made TNG work.
@Kolanaki @hesusingthespiritbomb
Whoopie Goldberg’s desire to come in the show probably helped a bit, too. Or did she come for the beard?Oh she came for the beard ;)
They straight up got rid of crusher for a season
I believe McFadden was fired, which was why she disappeared for no reason or fanfare.
TNG had serious problems in the beginning and had some pretty big flaws even as the show got going. Off the top of my head
You’re not wrong. I think the only main character that really had any development in the first 2 seasons is Dr Pulaski, going from someone completely unfamiliar with Data, and conscious machinery, to being an ardent supporter of his. We had a little but in Data settling into being an emotionless Android trying to learn to be more human, and Geordi becoming Chief Engineer, but they were very minor background tweaks to the characters.
Everyone else barely changed at all in that time, except for Lt. Yar, who went from being a living breathing person to corpse.
The Ferengi
they were awful, but they did give me a good basis for imagining wolf-of-wall-street types
I love the first few episodes, I prefer babyface riker, and I think Dick Picard was a cool badass who I fully support.
But they should have kept Crusher, and the political conflicts were a ridiculous joke epitomized by the cartoonish ferengi. S3 gave us much better aesthetics and politics (though the new character driven storytelling might be a matter of taste).
Sigh.
Ok, let’s hear what you think the racism and sexism was.
well when I googled “racism in star trek tng” i got “code of honor” so maybe start there
result number 2 was also “code of honor” followed in third place by…well, the 1960s.
4 is code of honor, 5 is ds9, 6 is 1960s, and 7 is ‘beyond the stars’ one of the best episodes of all the treks, but only present in the results because it discussed racism. in the 60s (ok 50s so shoot me).
Have you watched season 1?
Did you skip over Code of Honor? Wouldn’t blame you if you did, of course.
It’s always funny looking back at stuff like this. I remember looking at old articles about Catherine Tate becoming a companion in doctor who and people were furious - and in retrospect not only was she one of the best companions, but that was probably the greatest era of the show.
Heath Ledger is another classic example. I remember the Internet being so confused and mad about the choice. ‘The 10 Things I Hate About You guy!?’
Same thing with Michael Keaton as Batman. He was still Mr Mom at that point.
And Craig as Bond.
No, they were right about that one.
I came here to post this. I remember someone insisting it was like casting Gary Coleman as Two-Face.
Although the response wasn’t as strong, there were fans who were also convinced that Robert Downey Jr. was a poor fit for Tony Stark.
Iron man was a hail mary by Marvel. Their IP was failing. RDJ was a lucky casting. Given where he was at at the time he was a pretty risky pick. Marvel didn’t really have the budget to be too picky at the time.
There’s a reason Spiderman is owned by sony and the hulk by universal.
And FF and X-Men by Fox before their acquisition.
Haha, Spock wasn’t replaced by LaForge. Spock was replaced by Data.
Somehow every character except the black man has a name, and every actor except the black one gets a serious headshot. hmm.
Yep, I noticed that too … it’s pretty damn obvious actually!
Wdym, Burton has a normal photo and the character is named among the others. Stewart’s picture is from a performance, so also different.
Also funny how you’re complaining about someone not getting named, and you’re just referring to him as a black man.
you’re just referring to him as a black man.
yes, in this case the pertinent piece of information is not that he is hero of all 80’s childrens’ childhoods, book advocate and reading rainbow star LeVar Burton. what matters for the point i am trying to make is that i am presuming the pov of the editor of that article: oh, hes the black guy who is gonna be the new spock. (his character name is not “the new spock”)
its ok to do that. I don’t think LeVar Burton is going to not get the point.
Its also a bit hard to make out, but they spell his name Lavar as well. I could see him stylizing it at some point and going from Levar to LeVar, but his name is Levardis and did not ever go by Lavar from what I can find. So, going back to my point, editor clearly ignored and deprioritized him in particular vs the white members of the cast.
It also feels like they intentionally picked that photo for contrast value: smiling so broadly when that is something “the original Spock” never did. They were going for the outrage factor, truth be damned.
i like this idea, could buy that
deleted by creator
Yeah, who even thought that for a second?
I grew up with Next Generation first, sitting on my dad’s lap watching the show with him.
When I first watched TOS I remember seeing Spock and saying, “oh yeah, the original Data”.
Especially since Spock was often described by Bones as being a walking computer, and Data was described as an Android. It would be less of a logical leap than having Geordi be the new Spock.
I remember thinking, “I don’t wanna watch a Trek without Spock,” and then Data came along and I was hooked.
Was that part of the marketing at the time, or just some bizarre leap from the author? I’m having a hard time finding any good comparisons between La Forge and Spock. In season 1 Geordi wasn’t even in engineering, let alone the science officer. He was a helmsman, so in that sense more comparable to Sulu or Chekhov, and he certainly doesn’t have anything like the relationship with the captain that Spock did.
Is it just because he was a recognizable name at the time? It’s just a weird jump to make.
Nobody dislikes Star Trek as much as Star Trek fans.
Damn Star Trek fans, they ruined Star Trek!
This is actually true though
I remain slightly miffed about how Dr Pulaski, one of the few characters that received any development in TNG S2, was so hated by some fans that it caused to Diane Muldur to swear off of Trek altogether.
She might not have entirely understood Data to begin with, but she did become better at that later on, a stark contrast to much of the rest of the Federation, which would still be arguing whether he, or his children had personhood, and is the only Starfleet Doctor in RetroTrek to actively take an interest in and engage with her patient’s cultures.
I can’t envision early Dr Crusher taking part in Worf’s Klingon tea ceremony, for example.
Still better than Star Wars fans, though. Same as it ever was
LOL. The TNG hate was ridiculous, but one other thing - nobody ignores a Star Trek fan better than other fans of Star Trek.
I thought that was a Star Wars thing, but I guess it’s just a thing in general. For reference I like it all, Star Wars, Star Trek, TOS, TNG
“LeVar Burton: The new Spock” 👀
deleted by creator
There were Star Trek fans at the time screaming from the rooftops about how TNG would ruin Star Trek. Before TNG even aired. But, there were also Star Trek fans who, while disappointed to not have the TOS crew back, were curious about what TNG was going to bring to the table. And, really happy to have a Star Trek series again. But, “Curious Trekkies Wait to See What’s What with TNG” wasn’t going to sell as many papers and stir up as much drama.
“Bad Trek is better than no Trek” was the begrudging opinion of TOS fans for the first season of TNG.
Lol. That was it. I’m glad TNG had more seasons, getting better and better as time went on.
Wasnt it 20 years later too? I mean the og crew probably didn’t want to come back
Yeah. The TOS cast did movies, but there’s a difference between doing a film and doing a weekly series. TOS was comfort viewing, and fans were going to fan in wanting more of the same.
There were Star Trek fans at the time screaming from the rooftops about how TNG would ruin Star Trek.
Is this what people had to do to spread their word before the internet?
Well, they probably have one point - how many modern Trek fans have even watched TOS?
Surely most, right?
I’m a millennial, and TOS was my first introduction to Trek.
I’ve seen maybe a quarter of the episodes. Seen every other trek episode multiple times. I know it’s blasphemy but trek got a lot better post Roddenberry
1985, TNG was definitely my introduction, really even Voyager and then got into TNG from there. I haven’t seen more than a couple TOS episodes but have seen everything else (except the animated ones, and many of the old movies barely watched once)
A lot, I think. At the time of TNG’s initial broadcast, TOS was omnipresent in syndication. And outside of TAS, the only Star Trek series at the time. Star Trek fans watched the heck out of TOS. Then, the Star Trek movies with the TOS cast. The first four films were released before TNG first aired.
Friend, I hate to say this, but TNG aired 35 years ago…
I’m aware. So is the newspaper article this post is about.
Clickbait certainly existed well before clicks did.
I’ll bet that any TOS fans who were furious at the time probably did not go on to like the show. If they were looking for that witty love/hate triangle of Spock/Kirk/McCoy they didn’t get it.
But as the name suggests, TNG reached a totally new generation of fans. American culture had changed a LOT between these two shows and anyone attached to the old one was either old themselves or hooked on reruns.
TNG didn’t slap big right away, either. It took time to get good and find its audience. But I’m so glad they succeeded.
I say all this to point out that angry fans weren’t actually wrong. The Trek they knew was never coming back. It became a whole other thing for a whole other group of people.
The difference between this and, say, the Star Wars sequels is that those sequels disappointed fans AND failed to find a new audience that was just as dedicated and even larger.
People like to use this article to show that angry fans are just idiots- always there and usually wrong. But the TNG miracle hasn’t been repeated many times, if ever, by any of these other franchise rehashes that a Hollywood has shoved out to grab for cash.
I’ll bet that any TOS fans who were furious at the time probably did not go on to like the show.
As a TOS fan who wasn’t too happy with what I had heard before TNG came out, I would bet against you. Most of them probably became TNG fans eventually, because the most impactful thing a show can do is simply to be great. Canon complaints are mostly about nostalgia, and if the show is compelling (especially if it’s compelling in a similar way to the old show), nostalgia can’t compete. If anything I’d guess that the people in this article were more likely to become fans of TNG, because it would have exceeded their expectations, which can make things seem better than they would otherwise.
Were you really a Trekkie if you thought TNG was going to be good in 1987?
Kidding, sort of. I remember thinking it was going to be a cash grab, and I still think I was right to think so at the time. Keep in mind, you couldn’t go on the Web and instantly know everything about an upcoming TV show. I think I learned it was in production from the back of a cereal box. I didn’t even know Gene Roddenberry was involved. The Enterprise-D design was pretty weird, and the cast of characters was more than a bit out there–a Klingon? On the Enterprise crew? Come on.
As a kid, I saw a contest on a box of cheerios(?) where you could be an child extra in one of the first TNG episodes. So for most of the first season, I sincerely thought Wil Wheaton/Wesley was the winner.
Anyway, the first few episodes during season 1 were not great, but I was content to finally get some new material. I’m glad TNG had enough time to “find its own groove”.
Man, that cereal box really launched Wheaton’s career. Haha
Well, he didn’t have much of an acting career after TNG. I would highly recommend Wil Wheaton’s book Still Just A Geek that he just published a few months ago, I’ve been listening to the audiobook (read by Wheaton) and it’s really good, and there’s some stuff that’s “exclusive” to the audio version (stuff he thought of as he was reading it again lol)
I liked him in Leverage
It’s fair to have expected TNG to be a cash grab. I’m sure TNG was a cash grab among all the other things it was. We all want to get paid, after all. I’m just glad it turned out to be so much more as well.
I’m reminded of the letters page of Aquaman in the issue after he lost his hand.
“To those of you saying we did it for the shock value, we have this to say for ourselves: we sure didn’t do it for the boredom value.”
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Help Geordi is staring into my soul.
LeVar Burton has striking eyes to begin with. When a person is used to seeing him as Geordi with his visor on, seeing him with it off is like he has 100 watt bulbs screwed into his head.
There had to be a better picture of him to use, lol
Nope, that’s the best picture I’ve ever seen of him.
Counterpoint:
deleted by creator
dope af
If you’ve seen the original Battlestar Galactica you’ll know why they were worried.
Only good thing about that show was that in space, bras were unpopular.
That’s because, according to renown space expert George Lucas, wearing a bra in space would strangle the wearer, which is why Princess Leia jiggled her way around the Death Star. So, it’s not that they were unpopular, just that they were a safety issue.
I mean, she wasn’t jiggling. Carrie had often complained about how tightly bound she was, he specifically didn’t want that look either. Nothing at all in that outfit would have honestly made a huge difference in how the whole thing felt I think, at least in hindsight it would really cheapen it.
They made a soft scifi show that little kids could enjoy featuring the guy who likes animals and did Alpo commercials. BSG wasn’t bad. It just wasn’t great like Dr Who or Buck Rodgers were at the time.
Don’t get me wrong I love braless women in the prime of their 20s.
This is why I don’t pay attention to the initial nerd reception
