Star Trek The Next Generation movies and whether they basically suck

[Jay 37,467]

This thread is reminding me that I really need to watch through The Next Generation sometime. Then I can finally see what all the fuss is about with DS9.

[Wojo 2,453]

It shares a lot in common with the remagined Battlestar Galactica series that followed: a huge cast of strong, three-dimensional characters, epic space battles, and multi-season story arcs. If you like one, you really should like the other.

[Jay 37,467]

I am sure I will. I watched DS9 live when it first premiered up until around the end of season 2 or so.... so basically I stopped watching before the whole Dominion business started.

I also want to see Babylon 5 some day.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Its better then BSG!

[Wojo 2,453]

DS9 never really gets as weird as BSG towards the end, what with its angel Starbuck and destiny and shared music and shared Cylon/human visions and searching for God. Sure, DS9 had the Prophets and Pah-Wraiths, but they were there the whole time, they weren't just deus ex machina thrown in at the last minute.

I swear that these two were separated at birth:

I rather liked Bashir, but I wanted to shove Baltar out an airlock in the mini-series when he fudged the lottery, and that was a feeling I never, ever shook.

[Jay 37,467]

You're not supposed to like Baltar.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I didn't like Bashir at first, but after he became friends with O'Brien .... (just one of the many great DS9 relationships)

[Wojo 2,453]

You're not supposed to like Baltar.

Oh don't start telling me who I'm supposed to and not supposed to like in something! Next you're gonna tell me how I should feel! As if John Williams wrote the music or something.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You're not supposed to like Baltar.

True, but yet somehow you do.

Even though he's a selfish, vain, arrogant, treacherous, manipulative SOB, you do kinds care about him.

During the scene were he was tortured by Adama and Rosslin, I was totally on his side.

[Wojo 2,453]

True. After all, who wouldn't sell out the human race for a piece of Number Six?

[Jay 37,467]

All the characters in BSG have good and bad sides, they are all in the grey, and that's part of what made the show so great.

[Wojo 2,453]

No doubt, and some of the DS9 characters are the same way. They all have their dark little secrets that would make Roddenberry squrim. Bashir and O'Brien definitely come to mind. Quark, but he's a Ferengi so you know it's in his DNA. Damar and especially Dukat, but they're villains so you know what you're getting. Every Weyoun chews the scenery enjoyably. One of the finest characters on the entire show is the wonderfully complex Garak.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I love the pairing of Odo and Garak.

One so straight forward and forthright. Valuing truth above all else, the other un-willing to tell anything remotely close to the truth if he can tell a lie, distortion of an evasion instead.

[Marian Schedenig 8,239]

All the characters in BSG have good and bad sides, they are all in the grey, and that's part of what made the show so great.

Some characters are "basically" likeable, some aren't. What made BSG bold is that even the most likeable characters had their moments when they became the most serious war criminals imaginable, and yet somehow they managed to make them likeable again a few weeks later.

[Jay 37,467]

Yup. It was very interesting. Beyond all that stuff, I also really enjoyed the plots, acting, sets, special effects, and music of the show. Always looked forward to every episode from when I got into it up until the end. Listening to Ronald D. Moore's podcast commentaries after each episode aired also greatly enhanced the experience.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I liked Baltar in both series. Though in the original he was beyond redemption.

Jason, do not watch TNG and think you can slide into DS9. DS9 is more ensemble driven, with story arcs over many episodes and themes and plots slowly revolving and developing. Like all Star Trek from NG onwards these series get better from season 3 onwards. Star Trek got worse in season 3.

Garek is my favorite DS9 character.

[Jay 37,467]

Huh? I just said I want to watch both TNG and DS9. Whether the shows are the same or different is irrelevant; I already know I want to watch both all the way through.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Garek is my favorite DS9 character.

Kira is my fav. Stunning, gorgeous, complicated, strong, independent, caring, loyal and vulnerable.

Odo is the one i connect the closest too.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

wow, Kira is your favorite, Hello Captain Obvious,

The Cardassian are probably my favorite of the alien characters, not to be confused with the Kardashians who deserve total annihilation. Sorry Butters.

[Wojo 2,453]

The Cardassian are probably my favorite of the alien characters, not to be confused with the Kardashians who deserve total annihilation.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

wow, Kira is your favorite, Hello Captain Obvious,

Only to long term posters. Ive been in the closet about her for ages.

The Cardassian are probably my favorite of the alien characters,

Yes, they were created on TNG to create villains who could speak in an intelligent and articulate manner to Picard.

Garak is great. Dukat made a fantastic and multi-faceted villain.

David Warner had a brilliant guest role as a Cardassian torturing Picard.

THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!

[Wojo 2,453]

When you read about Dukat, the makeup artists actually modeled the Cardassian race on Marc Alaimo's neck muscles because they were so prominent. To watch his exemplary performances again would be my biggest reason for revisiting DS9.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Yes, he does have a fabulous neck.

Alaimo is the most badass looking of the Cardassisans

[JoeinAR 1,949]

wow, Kira is your favorite, Hello Captain Obvious,

Only to long term posters. Ive been in the closet about her for ages.

The Cardassian are probably my favorite of the alien characters,

Yes, they were created on TNG to create villains who could speak in an intelligent and articulate manner to Picard.

Garak is great. Dukat made a fantastic and multi-faceted villain.

David Warner had a brilliant guest role as a Cardassian torturing Picard.

THERE ARE FOUR LIGHTS!

THERE ARE FIVE LIGHTS.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

[Uni 306]

Of course the NG movies are "canon"—meaning they're Star Trek movies. Your personal dislike of any or all of them doesn't disqualify them from that.

I've been taking my younger son through the series (TNG) now that he's old enough to appreciate them. After enduring the first season (only a couple of worthy entries there) and most of the much-better-but-still-hadn't-arrived-yet second season, we're getting to the good stuff. And there's plenty to appreciate. It's an experience I'd recommend to anyone, even if it means having to sit through "Casino Royale" one more time (that one wasn't quite on the level of the Bond reboot).

- Uni

[Jay 37,467]

You lost me. What does Casino Royale have to do with Star Trek?

[Faleel 5,402]

i find TNG boring and actually cheesier than TOS, so I don't really care for the TNG films/characters, so I prefer the TOS/JJST films

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You lost me. What does Casino Royale have to do with Star Trek?

I agree!

[Uni 306]

Whoops—misnomer on my part. "The Royale" was an episode from the second season based on the Casino Royale setting. In my opinion, it ranks as the second worst episode of the entire series (coming in just after "Encounter At Farpoint").

- Uni

[Wojo 2,453]

You lost me. What does Casino Royale have to do with Star Trek?

Stuart Baird directed Star Trek Nemesis and edited Casino Royale.

Lol

Does he know Kevin Bacon?

What do they call a Casino Royale with cheese? And bacon!

[Marian Schedenig 8,239]

Whoops—misnomer on my part. "The Royale" was an episode from the second season based on the Casino Royale setting. In my opinion, it ranks as the second worst episode of the entire series (coming in just after "Encounter At Farpoint").

Even worse than the late (season 6?) episode with Dr. Crusher's wet ghost dreams? Or the S1 episode with the nigger* aliens who kidnap Tasha? *) Deliberately using the non-PC term here because these aliens are really written as black savages. That at least the actors didn't simply refuse to film that episode still fascinates me.

[Brónach 1,302]

I've seen Q who?, part of Encounter at Farpoint, and little else.

[Uni 306]

Even worse than the late (season 6?) episode with Dr. Crusher's wet ghost dreams?

That was a season 7 show . . . and you're right, it definitely deserves a prominent place on a "worst-of-TNG" list.

- Uni

[Wojo 2,453]

I would rank "Shades of Gray" as the worst because it's a clip show, and I despise clip shows.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,489]

Whoops—misnomer on my part. "The Royale" was an episode from the second season based on the Casino Royale setting. In my opinion, it ranks as the second worst episode of the entire series (coming in just after "Encounter At Farpoint").

- Uni

That one? Really? I thought it was pretty good, aside from Picard not understanding the way people in the early 20th century spoke, which was a minor complaint. It reminded me a lot of the scene in Star Trek IV where Kirk calls out the way people in the 80s swear every other word when they talk. The irony is that Kirk and plenty of other Star Trek characters frequently spoke like 20th century Earthlings, including swearing. Not every other word, but it wasn't much of a stretch in The Royale or Voyage Home.

But I liked The Royale. Worst TNG episode is easily Shades of Gray. It's mostly clips of previous episodes, Riker twitching on a table and Troi crying. There were rarely any episodes after the first couple seasons that I didn't like. I think I mostly liked all the early episodes as well, despite the cheese. Season 3 obviously set the standard for the rest of the series and it was pretty much smooth sailing from there.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

You lost me. What does Casino Royale have to do with Star Trek?

Stuart Baird directed Star Trek Nemesis and edited Casino Royale.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,489]

I think editing is where his heart truly lies.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

You lost me. What does Casino Royale have to do with Star Trek?

Stuart Baird directed Star Trek Nemesis and edited Casino Royale.

Lol

Does he know Kevin Bacon?

[Marian Schedenig 8,239]

I would rank "Shades of Gray" as the worst because it's a clip show, and I despise clip shows.

Oh that. It's so bad I usually forget it exists.

[Uni 306]

That one? Really? I thought it was pretty good, aside from Picard not understanding the way people in the early 20th century spoke, which was a minor complaint. It reminded me a lot of the scene in Star Trek IV where Kirk calls out the way people in the 80s swear every other word when they talk. The irony is that Kirk and plenty of other Star Trek characters frequently spoke like 20th century Earthlings, including swearing. Not every other word, but it wasn't much of a stretch in The Royale or Voyage Home.

That's an ongoing nitpick about the Trek universe: they consistently behave as though they've been completely disconnected from their own history just a few centuries earlier (although they have no problem citing more ancient history and mythology all the time). Sorta like in the Voyager episode "The 57's," when they're all examining the early 20th-century pickup truck with no clue as to what it is. That's like one of us looking at a horse-drawn carriage or a musket as though it's an alien artifact. I know they're trying to go all "future" on us, but it only winds up making them look too stupid to be out exploring the galaxy.

I would rank "Shades of Gray" as the worst because it's a clip show, and I despise clip shows.

Oh that. It's so bad I usually forget it exists.

I think most people do (myself included). Now that's a show that truly isn't considered canon.

- Uni

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Clip shows work on comedies, sometimes.

Never on anything else.

Bottom of the barrel Trek. Down there with the Alternative Factor

[Wojo 2,453]

That's an ongoing nitpick about the Trek universe: they consistently behave as though they've been completely disconnected from their own history just a few centuries earlier (although they have no problem citing more ancient history and mythology all the time). Sorta like in the Voyager episode "The 57's," when they're all examining the early 20th-century pickup truck with no clue as to what it is. That's like one of us looking at a horse-drawn carriage or a musket as though it's an alien artifact. I know they're trying to go all "future" on us, but it only winds up making them look too stupid to be out exploring the galaxy.

Star Trek's knowledge of contemporary history and slang will change based on what kind of joke they're trying to make at the time or whatever plot device they want to exploit.

Riker comments that the initial Borg cube is "carving us up like a roast" and calls Data "Pinocchio" in "Encounter at Farpoint," and both Data and O'Brien discuss the semantics of "burning the midnight oil" in the show's finale, but La Forge never heard the phrase "take a leak" before in First Contact. Kirk can't pay Gillian for the pizza she bought him, yet McCoy will give real money for Chang to shut up.

Scotty talks into a mouse -- that's just funny -- but I hope this top-notch engineer at least knows what a pen and paper are. Though I can't admit knowing how to use a slide rule or analog calipers, so I'll forgive him.

I remember liking that episode of Voyager that you mentioned, "The 37's." Fortunately, Tom Paris knows how to use a car, but everyone else acts like they're looking at something that modern science has never seen, which suggests that no documentary or movie footage of an automobile was ever viewed by anybody on the ship, ever, at any time. Ludicrous. I doubt there are many devices used 400 years ago that we today don't understand how it works. Harry Kim (who I'll dismiss as something of an idiot anyways) actually asks who Amelia Earhart is. That's not much smarter than Commander Decker having to explain what NASA stands for in The Motion Picture, when you think that Starfleet personnel -- NASA of the future -- would have been well instructed in "ancient" human aerospace.

Furthermore, culture explored in the 24th century rotates heavily around the "classics" that we observed in the 1980s and 1990s. Crewmembers listened to opera and Berlioz and performed Shakespeare and Sherlock Holmes and watched very early movies, but nobody mentions works of fiction made in the 2100s, 2200s, and 2300s. Data played cards with geniuses known to the contemporary audience without having to invent a physicist from the 2200s. But it's as if human culture stagnated between the audience's contemporary time and whatever time is represented by the particular Star Trek story. That could indicate that the Trek production teams wanted to stick to cultural references that the audience would get, or those only in the public domain to reduce costs. Or even because it was hard enough to keep details consistent from episode to episode and show to show, why also invent fake movies and books and music that will be hotbeds for inconsistency? Voyager broke through with the slightly interesting Captain Proton.

You can't argue that World War III destroys all records of contemporary culture because of how much else the Trek writers were able to use.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

At least Picard knew his history!

[Wojo 2,453]

I wish I could think of one flub he made. This will take some hunting.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

THERE ARE NO FLUBS!

[Uni 306]

I called it "The 57's," didn't I? Man, I'm gettin' bad with some of these episode titles. . . .

Bottom line: cultures of the past have been all but destroyed, but that doesn't prevent us from featuring them in museums. Or from requiring that even our children learn the basics of history.

- Uni

[Nick1Ø66 4,774]

Yes, the Next Gen movies are shit, and yes, they are cannon.

The JJ Abrams movie is shit Trek also (though decent cinema under any other name).

There actually hasn't been a really good Star Trek movie since Save The Whales, though VI was entertaining enough.

[Wojo 2,453]

Right, Uni. Anyone who didn't sleep through history knows that Hannibal marched an army of Carthaginian elephants over the Alps into Rome thousands of years before he served Ray Liotta's thoughts directly to him. For anyone to forget something pretty significant after only 400 years makes them seem uneducated, and I don't want uneducated people flying multi-trillion credit starships in my distant future.

Yes, the Next Gen movies are shit, and yes, they are cannon.

The JJ Abrams movie is shit Trek also (though decent cinema under any other name).

There actually hasn't been a really good Star Trek movie since Save The Whales, though VI was entertaining enough.

Now see, if you were a farmer, shit would be a good thing. Cow shit's good for crops and sheep shit's used for mushrooms. You'd pay good money for good shit. Shit would be your bread and butter.

[Nick1Ø66 4,774]

Scotty talks into a mouse -- that's just funny -- but I hope this top-notch engineer at least knows what a pen and paper are. Though I can't admit knowing how to use a slide rule or analog calipers, so I'll forgive him.

Hmmmm. I've always wondered about that. In a society where everything is either done via voice command, or some sort of nebulous pushing of random buttons and swiping pads, how is Scotty so fast and proficient at a QWERTY keyboard? Indeed, significantly faster than a 20th century professional typist would be. Has anyone ever seen any character on Star Trek using a QWERTY keyboard before Scotty's masterful display?

I think these people recognizing 20th century technology is one thing, but would they know how to use most of it? Probably not. And yes, there are doubtless countless antiquated artifacts from our own history that most of us have never seen or even heard of, because they have been forgotten with disuse and are only of interest to historians, anthropologists, archaeologists and bored Ph.d's. These items may have been everyday items in Mesopotamia that any idiot could use, but most of us would likely not even begin to be able to understand what they were used for...much less actually use them. That doesn't make us stupid, or uneducated.

And I actually found Tom Paris' fascination with the 20th century to be contrived, silly and unbelievable...a way of trying to make a connection with the audience and make some inside jokes, but it just came across as forced and ham handed.