[starwarsrcks]

Is that when Picard became a borg, resistance is futile. I have seen TNG any differences between TOS and TNG

[Zardoz]

Yes, ignore is a great thing!

[horatio]

Originally Posted by kevin

I'm not referring to characters or character development.

What I mean though, is that he had an ability to present space itself as big, and that the ship was out there far from home in territory wondrous and dangerous at the same time.

Seasons 1 and 2 of TNG had that, later seasons didn't, and nor did DS9 or VOY despite actually being set far out. Voyager was supposed to be decades from home, yet ended up with monthly emails home!

Hardly vast!!

There's just something in the way he was able to present that side of things. It's a skill no subsequent showrunner or writer on TNG etc had. Although they were all better at character work.

Originally Posted by kevin

Piller was a blessing and a curse in some respects. He wanted to concentrate on the characters and I believe his dictat for season 3 was that if nothing in an episode developed a character or characters in some relevant way - he didn't want to know.

Which is good for the actors and the viewers who are invested in those characters.
But....season 3 is also when TNG completely lost the feeling of the ship being out there exploring deep space and the last time it had that TOS feel of the sheer incalculable vastness of Space. That ultimately led the overall series feeling as though space had 'shrunk' and that it wasn't so big that was a (I feel, anyway) problem the later series subtly suffered from.

I share your view, but the majority considers epic stories like "Yesterday's Enterprise" or "Best of Both Worlds" to have been groundbreaking for TNG.

I like Piller and his influence upon Trek but the family element (and literally all the family-focused stories that popped up in the third season, not very memorable besides "Sins of the Fathers") was poison for Trek.
In the last episode, Picard learns an important lesson from Q and gets a glimpse of insight into how the universe works, a mind boggling experience, and what does he do ... go to his 'second family' to play poker. It is a great final moment for TNG but it also shows how small the family ingredient keeps Trek.
Not to mention mum Janeway, stories like "Year of Hell" told much more about the characters without the restricting family element.

[TNG_Trekman]

Originally Posted by kevin

There's just something in the way he was able to present that side of things. It's a skill no subsequent showrunner or writer on TNG etc had. Although they were all better at character work.

Which in retrospect didn't amount to anything. I felt that TNG had some of the lowest character development out of any of the other Star Trek shows. A few things crept up here and there but decisions and character growth that were made in one episode rarely transitioned over to the next one.

The only time this was done well in TNG was "Family" after the BoBW two parter. Family showed Picard's struggle with returning to normal after the horrific events that occurred. That moment where he begins to break down in front of Robert in the Vineyard was just great acting on Stewart's part.

But what about after the Chain of Command two parter? The next episode didn't mention a single thing about what Picard would of been going through after being tortured.

I just wish TNG would of had better character development. Heck, even VOY had better character development. ENT too! And that just sucks!

This is really the only nitpick I have about the show.

[Mr pointy ears]

I have to admit that what really got me into trek was TNG more than the original series,ok, i seen episodes of tos and the movies,but picard and co is the BIG reason i got into trek.

[kevin]

Originally Posted by TNG_Trekman

Which in retrospect didn't amount to anything. I felt that TNG had some of the lowest character development out of any of the other Star Trek shows. A few things crept up here and there but decisions and character growth that were made in one episode rarely transitioned over to the next one.

The only time this was done well in TNG was "Family" after the BoBW two parter. Family showed Picard's struggle with returning to normal after the horrific events that occurred. That moment where he begins to break down in front of Robert in the Vineyard was just great acting on Stewart's part.

But what about after the Chain of Command two parter? The next episode didn't mention a single thing about what Picard would of been going through after being tortured.

I just wish TNG would of had better character development. Heck, even VOY had better character development. ENT too! And that just sucks!

This is really the only nitpick I have about the show.

No it probably doesn't amount to much for everyone, nor is it make-or-break for me - it just highlights a talent Roddenberry had that no-one subsequent to him did, IMO.

(it is a significant complaint I have with Voyager, but that's another thing)

I should also perhaps clarify that TNG is actually the series I love the most as it was the first Star Trek series I saw from the get-go. Without it I wouldn't have got into Trek period and it's my first love. However, as with all Star Trek series it had it's positives and negatives, depending on what you want out of a show.

For me that early TOS atmosphere was something that noticeably faded as the show switched over to focusing on the characters and what happened to them.

As a rule, Star Trek at that time (and even til it ended) wasn't a weekly soap opera so yes, sometimes episodes dealt with issues that didn't run over a long period. Another example would be Geordi's kidnap by the Romulans in saeson 4 that was not discussed again.

However, we also have to live with the fact that such longer style stories are not what TNG (or Star Trek normally) was about. Berman did not like that style of TV and so some things are hampered simply by the conventions of US television in the 1990s and the influence of the producers.

[TNG_Trekman]

Originally Posted by kevin

No it probably doesn't amount to much for everyone, nor is it make-or-break for me - it just highlights a talent Roddenberry had that no-one subsequent to him did, IMO.

(it is a significant complaint I have with Voyager, but that's another thing)

I should also perhaps clarify that TNG is actually the series I love the most as it was the first Star Trek series I saw from the get-go. Without it I wouldn't have got into Trek period and it's my first love. However, as with all Star Trek series it had it's positives and negatives, depending on what you want out of a show.

For me that early TOS atmosphere was something that noticeably faded as the show switched over to focusing on the characters and what happened to them.

As a rule, Star Trek at that time (and even til it ended) wasn't a weekly soap opera so yes, sometimes episodes dealt with issues that didn't run over a long period. Another example would be Geordi's kidnap by the Romulans in saeson 4 that was not discussed again.

However, we also have to live with the fact that such longer style stories are not what TNG (or Star Trek normally) was about. Berman did not like that style of TV and so some things are hampered simply by the conventions of US television in the 1990s and the influence of the producers.

Yeah I see your point. I too grew up with TNG. And what can I say, im a sucker for Soap Opera style serials (but I would never watch an actually Soap Opera, strangely enough).

It's something I can't change now so I'll let it be and love TNG all the same (judging by my name that might go without saying). It just would be interesting to see how the show might of played out if say Ron Moore or Michael Pillar had ran it instead.

(I'm also going to point out that that's why I like DS9 alot too. This isn't a DS9 thread so that's all I'll say on that).

One last note: I thought "Generations" was the best TNG movie strictly on a character bias. I felt it portrayed the heart and feelings of these characters we love! Even though Kirk was given a bad death I thought the whole notion of loosing people you love and how that affects you was so strong. The whole scene in the Nexus when Picard looks at the family he could of had and sees his late nephew alive and well made me cry (I ADMIT IT).

Ron Moore and Branon Braga said they would of done it differently and yes the movie had it's flaws but I thought they made one of the best character driven stories in all of Star Trek lore.

[kevin]

Originally Posted by TNG_Trekman

Yeah I see your point. I too grew up with TNG. And what can I say, im a sucker for Soap Opera style serials (but I would never watch an actually Soap Opera, strangely enough).

It's something I can't change now so I'll let it be and love TNG all the same (judging by my name that might go without saying). It just would be interesting to see how the show might of played out if say Ron Moore or Michael Pillar had ran it instead.

(I'm also going to point out that that's why I like DS9 alot too. This isn't a DS9 thread so that's all I'll say on that).

One last note: I thought "Generations" was the best TNG movie strictly on a character bias. I felt it portrayed the heart and feelings of these characters we love! Even though Kirk was given a bad death I thought the whole notion of loosing people you love and how that affects you was so strong. The whole scene in the Nexus when Picard looks at the family he could of had and sees his late nephew alive and well made me cry (I ADMIT IT).

Ron Moore and Branon Braga said they would of done it differently and yes the movie had it's flaws but I thought they made one of the best character driven stories in all of Star Trek lore.

It was actually the Piller factor that altered the focus in season 3, so I think if you look at seasons 3 and 4 you would probably get a good sense of what the show may have been like if he had ran it for the rest of it's time.

I think where things went a bit sour was during season 6 and 7 which shifted the focus onto high-concept but sometimes ill thought out techy-gimmick shows like 'Genesis', 'Parallels', 'Sub Rosa' (even though that's my favourite Crusher one!) and many more.

All quite twisty, but lacking proper substance.

It's mostly why I tend to think it was a good thing that they ended the show after season 7 (even though at the time I was terribly upset, as back then I didn't want it to finish). In retrospect though, I felt it was - as a series - running out of steam a bit and was coasting on cast chemistry and familiarity by 1994.

[Zardoz]

Originally Posted by TNG_Trekman

Yeah I see your point. I too grew up with TNG. And what can I say, im a sucker for Soap Opera style serials (but I would never watch an actually Soap Opera, strangely enough).

It's something I can't change now so I'll let it be and love TNG all the same (judging by my name that might go without saying). It just would be interesting to see how the show might of played out if say Ron Moore or Michael Pillar had ran it instead.

(I'm also going to point out that that's why I like DS9 alot too. This isn't a DS9 thread so that's all I'll say on that).

One last note: I thought "Generations" was the best TNG movie strictly on a character bias. I felt it portrayed the heart and feelings of these characters we love! Even though Kirk was given a bad death I thought the whole notion of loosing people you love and how that affects you was so strong. The whole scene in the Nexus when Picard looks at the family he could of had and sees his late nephew alive and well made me cry (I ADMIT IT).

Ron Moore and Branon Braga said they would of done it differently and yes the movie had it's flaws but I thought they made one of the best character driven stories in all of Star Trek lore.

I agree with most of what your saying, but keep in mind the ere in which TNG was made. If they had made an anthology out of Picard's recovery in BOBW and COC, people would have tuned out in 1991, and 1993.

I think the writers had to balance story vs keeping veiwership in that timeframe.

Generations, that scene with Picard and the loss of his nephew was probbaly the best acted scene in ghe film hands down.

[TNG_Trekman]

Originally Posted by Zardoz

I agree with most of what your saying, but keep in mind the ere in which TNG was made. If they had made an anthology out of Picard's recovery in BOBW and COC, people would have tuned out in 1991, and 1993.

I think the writers had to balance story vs keeping veiwership in that timeframe.

Generations, that scene with Picard and the loss of his nephew was probbaly the best acted scene in ghe film hands down.

Yeah I understand. I know Ron Moore didn't like writing that way though. He likes his character journey's like I do. Maybe that's why I seem to like his writing so much lol.

Another interesting point is Babylon 5. How much that show risked to have a more serialized story and people still hung in there for all 5 seasons. And that ran from '93 to '98.

It's amazing isn't it? How TV can change in 15 years. I was too young to fully understand how it all worked in the early 90's but looking back and watching those TNG episodes on DVD and comparing them to today's episodic television I find some interesting changes. No episodic television lol. Reality TV and more prime time serialized TV. Shows like 24, Entourage, BSG, Lost, Fringe, Flash Forward etc. That's how alot of TV is now.

People now want more from TV than the "monster of the week" as it were (and we still get those too!).