PATRON TAKES - Star Trek TNG Encounter at Farpoint & general preview

Probably a mix of both, but the editing and interacting absolutely is the biggest part

Josh (Target Audience)

Adding more LGBTQ representation is not a small thing. It addresses TNG's greatest failing, which we can discuss as the series progresses.

Anthony Bernacchi

There would be even more effort needed to do the HD remasters for DS9 and Voyager. And these two shows were much less popular than TNG. http://www.madmind.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/startreknielsenratingaverage2.jpg

whacky deli

Something else you should know, back in the 80's they would often shoot tv shows on film and then take that film, transfer it to broadcast video and composite the visual effects in the video realm too. The result was something that looked good on the TV's of the day. They avoided the soap opera look of videotape (except for the effects shots) and had the flexibility and cost savings of editing on video. One of the first shows to do this was TNG. What you see now for TNG in HD was through meticulously digging up the film (most of which was stored but never edited and rebuild the entire episode and re-composite the effects (they filmed models). If you were to watch the original broadcast masters (which did see release on DVD) it would look somewhat like a higher quality VHS tape. Some small film segments of the seven seasons remain lost so they fall back to the video master and you will notice the lower quality. TNG was the only 80's 90's era Star z trek show to have the HD conversion done so far. DS9, Voyager and Enterprise are still shown from broadcast video masters.

Mike Rogers

I found a lot more enjoyment in the spin-off that followed The Next Generation (Deep Space Nine). I know TNG it is really beloved by its own fanbase of people, but I personally never could get too into it. There are a lot of good stories, some of them amazing. But it just never took hold on me the same way that TOS and DS9 did.

Kristopher

Keep in mind that I called none of those seasons "great" and I don't disagree that they include some very bad episodes. I called season 7 fine which is faint praise compared to the great seasons that make up the middle of the show. I completely agree that seasons 3-5 are the pinnacle, I just disagree that seasons 2 and 7 are rotten, that's too harsh in my opinion, there's too much good things in them. You want to see rotten Star Trek I present Enterprise seasons 1 and 2 and Picard season 2.

Phillip Grischa

No, not at all. Your opinion may differ, and that's fine. But objectively, when I see those seasons and take them as a whole, they're just badly written, have bad character development and due to Roddenberry's stupid 'No Conflict' ethos, have largely stupid stories. I always wondered why, until I saw Shatner's 'Chaos on the Bridge', then it made sense. As for S7, by that season the show was flat out of gas.... recycled ideas, uninspired writing (or regularly absurd) and many times, the acting was near painful to watch.... Stewart clearly wanted off that series and to move on, and it showed. Hey, I defend TOS with claws and teeth, but even I have to admit it had the dreaded S3 with some real stinkers and, frankly as a whole, it paled in comparison to S1 and S2. There is no rational, reasonable way to call TNG S1, S2 or S7 "great", and some of the episodes are simply terrible. Sorry, pal...truth is truth.

Shane Davis

IDIC

whacky deli

That's certainly a few hot takes.

Cameron Thacker

What made TOS really work was the chemistry in the cast. Yes there were some good stories but even the unintentionally silly stories were enjoyable due to the cast. The relationships between the characters, played by those actors, made it work. I like TNG and Voyager, and love DS9, but none of those came close to the cast chemistry. It’s not that there was no chemistry, but TOS was that once in a zillion years perfect mix. Again, I like all the shows, but there was just something extra about the TOS crew. The cultural phenomena of Trek came from those three seasons. And I agree, this is why the JJ Abrams reboot was about that crew.

Crankygrandma

All I can say is good luck with watching all the spin-off Trek stuff. They have their moments, but overall there's a heck of a lot of sand to sift through to get to a few gold nuggets. In magazine articles and concept photo releases building up to TNG's premiere, they made it sound like it would be an exciting, radical new thing, so I was pretty disappointed at what we got. It was like watching a bunch of yuppy cosplayers running around on sets that looked far less convincing than those made in the '60s. I wanted something new because I knew they couldn't match the original Trek, so I had no idea how they thought they could get away with remaking classic episodes. I checked out of watching this show after the embarrassing 8th episode "Justice", and didn't return to it until sometime in the 4th season, when I'd heard the show had gotten better. TNG has about a dozen of good episodes--mostly from seasons 3 to 6, and mainly in season 4--but where this show succeeds is with science-fiction concepts and plots, not with engaging characters, none of which I took a liking to. Don't expect anything on the level of Kirk-Spock-McCoy. Don't expect anything. I didn't like the design of the ship, either, especially its bridge. I understand the rationale behind the changes (i.e. comfort in space exploration) but to me it just looked like the Love Boat in space, and I think it was a reaction to this loungy, cruise ship feel that resulted in the hyper-military approach of the darkly depressing Star Trek VI. TOS had the perfect balance of "space navy" meets "space exploration" both visually and thematically. If TNG hadn't been syndicated by Paramount from the get-go, it's been said that it would have been cancelled on Network TV after one season due to poor ratings and reviews, so at least it got a chance to find its own identity and eventually produce some pretty decent episodes. If you find yourselves being profoundly underwhelmed, hang in there ... it does get better. Sort of.

Rocket Robin Hood

Well at the time that was all there was. I guess people were just as weary of a "reboot messing everything up" as we are today. (And it eventually did lol)

Andreas Schmitt

It's so strange to think that people thought that Star Trek wouldn't work without Kirk / Spock / Bones. Today Star Trek is so much more about its setting and themes than the individual characters who carry each show. When fans say "This didn't feel like Star Trek", it almost always regards the absence of TNG-style ideals.

Ryan Baillie

While I'm sure you guys will enjoy the majority of TNG season 1: what I hope you get from it early on is an understanding of why TNG is still seen as so important today. TOS created the foundations Star Trek's utopia, but its interpretation on screen shows its age. Today's Trek needs to quietly drop or retcon problematic elements of Roddenberry's 23rd century in order for it to remain aspirational. The same can't be said of the 24th century presented in TNG. When modern Trek plays in TNG's toybox they add more LGBTQ representation and some stronger female characters *and that's basically it.* The vast, VAST majority remains just as pure a utopia today as it seemed in 1987. People watch this show and they still go: "I want to live in that world. That's the world I'm gonna work towards." Encounter at Farpoint: Underwhelming intro with interesting ideas, but is clearly two separate episodes weaved together.

Ryan Baillie

Question for Josh. Is your encyclopedic knowledge of ST-TOS in part due to your editing those videos and interacting with the Target Audience viewers, or are you naturally someone who can remember all that kind of information?

Numinous2019

In case you're interested, the Biographics channel on YouTube recently posted an episode about the life of Gene Roddenberry. It doesn't go into a great deal of detail being only 23 minutes long, but it could be interesting for you to watch something about "The Great Bird of the Galaxy". No need for a reaction, just for personal enjoyment. And don't worry, there are no spoilers for TNG or anything else. https://youtu.be/J-62vwHZJS4?si=HoSvQvwJ3jYIsjjZ

KatWithAttitude

Let me rephrase that, I understand people make jokes to mask their own insecurities, I don't understand why people think these tired jokes are funny because where's the punchline? "Man in skirt" is just an observation and if people think that in itself is funny it says more about them than the show or the costume design. That doesn't mean you cannot dislike the look, saying it's a bad design is perfectly fine (very few costumes in season 1 are objectively good) but laughing at men in skirts is not valid criticism, it's immature.

Phillip Grischa

Very hyperbolic. Season 2 has a bunch of really strong episodes and season 7 is still fine, calling them rotten is overdramatic.

Phillip Grischa

TNG is not your grandfather's Star Trek. It's your FATHER'S Star Trek. lol Have fun! : )

StonyD

TNG basically sucks about 42% of the time, meaning Seasons 1,2 and 7 are near unwatchable in their rottenness. However, 3 and 4 and most of 5 are very good. Very uneven show, series wise. Kind of like one of the Stones 90's albums.....

Shane Davis

I agree. Let's also moderate eachother here, and point out when one of us went a bit too far with talking about something. All of us are able to edit our comments, so let's keep eachother in check. We all know that Alex and Josh started this journey specifically to get to TNG eventually, so let's make sure that their experience of it is the best it can be.

Andreas Schmitt

Ha let's hope

James Bottas

The people in TNG are much too well adjusted to have 24th century twitter.

whacky deli

Cmon dude. Everyone understands the jokes about the male skirts.

whacky deli

I would say that TNG definitely established itself and came out from under the shadow of TOS with season 3. For me, the season 3 finale/season 4 opener surpassed what TOS gave us. It then built on that with amazing episodes like “The Inner Light.” And eventually finished out with one of the greatest TV series finales ever. You are right in saying that the TNG movies stink and don’t touch the quality and excellence of the TOS movies. But as a show, TNG did surpass TOS, by delivering more high quality episodes and going further to 7 seasons.

whacky deli

Every season has clunkers, sure. Even season 3. But in season 1, every episode is a clunker. And season 2 has all clunkers except for 2 episodes.

whacky deli

To my fellow Trekkies: lets not spoil anything for Alex and Josh. Its tempting for US to reminisce, but if we do that, it might give them an idea of what to expect, and I’m sure most of us want them to go in blind. The music, tone, “opinions” of the first couple of seasons….let THEM be the judge before we “warn” them about whats considered good, and what considered not. If they weren’t reading this board, I wouldn’t care. But lets be careful, and watch them react! Love you all! 🖖🏼

Chris S.

At some point, when you have either finished TNG or else you are near it, you should check out a documentary called "Chaos on the Bridge". It goes into great detail about how the production of TNG for the first two years--and the writing room, especially--was nothing short of a complete dumpster fire in terms of staff turnover and behind-the-scenes politicking.

Timothy Hennon

Yes this is definitely when they started re-using ship models that they had made for other things already and that improved the look and feel of Star Trek a lot. More ship variety for Starfleet and for everybody else.

Andreas Schmitt

Spoiler territory. They don't need to hear about how something is handled later on. Let them draw their own conclusion in a season retrospective. We can comment stuff like this then.

Andreas Schmitt

TNG is basically a reboot of the aborted Star Trek: Phase 2 series that was planned 10 years earlier. You will notice how some of the characters and the theme music were carried over from Star Trek: TMP. You will also notice how poorly written some of the episodes are at first, which was due to Roddenberry. He was a great idea man but only a decent writer with lousy dialog. Fun fact: Gene Roddenberry did not want Patrick Stewart as the captain. Rick Berman felt like Stewart was the one. Stewart had to audition with his toupe but the producers later said to just lose it and play the character bald.

Collin Freeman

My biggest criticism of Encounter at Farpoint is that the mystery is way too easy to solve. That was the big test Q gave them? He might have just as well asked what's 2 + 2. 9 year old me figured it out the moment the space jellyfish showed up and specifically didn't attack the station, it did not take the best and brightest of humanity to do it. I also liked the male extras wearing the skirts a lot and I don't understand the jokes people made back then and sometimes even now. More generally speaking TNG had a rough start and got better the less Roddenberry was involved, it may sound harsh but it's true.

Phillip Grischa

I don't really agree with that, the Abrams movies used the TOS characters but they were also heavily influenced by TNG which treated the crew as more of an ensemble and shifted the focus around. Even Strange New Worlds is more similar to TNG in the way it approaches storytelling than TOS despite being set in the TOS era and using some TOS characters. TOS may have begun Star Trek and it is iconic but TNG turned Star Trek into a franchise that grew beyond its original characters and premise. Without TNG Star Trek most likely would have fizzled out in the early 90s with the TOS movies winding down. We maybe would have gotten a Lost in Space movie style late 90s reboot with all its shitty 90ness, people would have rolled their eyes and Paramount would have shelved Star Trek for a decade or two until the next reboot attempt. Star Trek as a viable franchise with hundreds of episodes and many different series and settings is a direct result of TNG's success not TOS's. and that's not a knock on TOS, it is still very important as the one that started it all but a franchise is actually started with the second entry.

Phillip Grischa

I have to disagree with the notion that TNG surpassed TOS in any sort of meaningful way of success. Two points: The three TNG movies and their lack of success is why we got Chris Pine. Second, look who they hired Pine to play. The proof is in the pudding, and only one of these casts is iconic or famous enough to warrant a reboot, and if I had to place a bet, TOS will get a threeboot before anyone looks to remake any other ST series.

Ken R

While TOS hit the ground running, TNG starts wobbly, but by season three it had hit its stride. Even in the first two seasons there were some good episodes, but on the whole I found the first two seasons weaker, as though the show was trying to find itself. I’d also ask you dig into your memory of Galaxy Quest, because there is a lot of TNG in there. Best new thing: the holodeck! As far as Encounter at Farpoint, I remember watching it when it aired. I liked it. TNG didn’t imitate TOS but was its own thing in the TREK universe, and taken on those terms it’s fun. Looking back on it after watching years of Trek, I can see how much of a “pilot” feel it had. But I had fun watching it at the time.

Crankygrandma

Your favorite writer DC Fontana had one hell of a time writing this one. It’s clearly the beginning of a new thing and it shows. That being said, as the season builds some gems will pop up and by season 3 this show is running on all cylinders.

Schnabley

For Encounter at Farpoint in particular, it's worth noticing that Riker and Troi are clearly adapted from Decker and Ilia back when TMP was planned to be a new series. Riker's the young ambitious first officer with some sort of romantic history with Troi, who has some sort of psychic ability. For starting TNG in general, I think Rich Evans said it best. "TNG season 1 is a show from the 80s using scripts written for the original show in the 60s by writers who grew up in the 30s". And all the positives and negatives of that apply to TNG season 1. It starts finding its own identity in season 2 and gets truly fantastic in season 3.

Jeff Cornell

I agree, it's better off deleted

James Bottas

Every season has clunkers. Some just have more than others.

KatWithAttitude

Anandashankar, this comment does not need to exist at all. Josh and Alex do NOT want to read it, we don't need opinions on other episodes in THIS venue, and we can do full season post-mortems when the season is OVER.

JD Nevesytrof

Whacky, please delete this spoiler for future content.

JD Nevesytrof

Q was the last flowering of Gene Roddenberry's personal view of God as a tester or tormenter of humanity, something to be opposed or overcome, something we saw in many episodes of TOS. It's to John DeLancie's credit that he used his sheer charisma to lend nuance to the stock Trek character.

JD Nevesytrof

Season 1 and 2 stink. They’re just so bad. It’s gonna be a long hard painful slog. But then you get to season 3 and it instantly becomes better than TOS, with classic episode after classic episode.

whacky deli

She had… like, one good episode. That’s it.

whacky deli

The musical score was out of control the first season. Way too much music. They toned it down as of Season 2, I think.

Tom Occhipinti

jeezus.. 😅

James Bottas

Remember how you talked about not liking the God-like episodes of TOS, hahaha welcome to far-point station ep. I am curious to your comparison. Be safe, be SMART, say you love TNG so much more than TOS. TNG fans can be a bit tunnel visioned and dismissive of TOS. NOT ALL but many over the years. Though to be fair many TOS fans had tunnel vision when TNG came out but now many original TOS fans are well............ dead... So tend to not comment on how much they didn't like TNG compared to TOS. So by the numbers TNG fans out number TOS fans

Prof Moff

I think seasons 1 and 2 are fine coming from TOS. They just look bad for someone who has seen all of TNG already at its best. In comparison to later seasons they may seem bad, but in comparison to that, TOS doesn't look that great either sometimes. Our guys will come into this completely fresh so they won't have that comparison. I doubt they will look at seasons 1 and 2 as bad because of that. All they can compare it to is TOS.

Andreas Schmitt

@Anandashankar Mazumdar Dude, they specifically asked NOT to reveal ANYTHING about future content. Delete this comment with the episode overview right now. This community was fantastic so far at not revealing anything, so don't start now that they are starting the most important step of their journey

Andreas Schmitt

My take on the TNG start as a whole: While the first season definitely has some absolute gold in it, it suffers from the fact that Gene Roddenberry treated it as a second attempt to make TOS Phase II. Hence all the parallels, like Decker and Ilia turning into Riker and Troy, and some obviously re-used scripts that were written for Phase II in the 70s and were a bit outdated by now. When Gene got too sick to continue and slowly stepped back, the writers gained more freedom and things improved. TNG gained the chance to find its own identiy. Despite that however the first two seasons have some of the most beloved episodes of the entire show. When you ask people for their favorite episodes, quite a few of them will be in the first two seasons. Since you are comeing at this from a fresh perspective, not having seen the later seasons, I think you will like season 1 just fine. Season 1 probably comes closest to seeing what Phase II might have been, if it had ever been made, so it is pretty interesting for that alone. And since season 1 feels the most like TOS due to basically being Phase II, you might even like it specifically for that familiar feeling. Initially not many people believed TNG could ever be successful. Even the cast believed "You cannot re-make Star Trek", and a lot of TOS fans hated it for, since Star Trek without Kirk, Spock and McCoy just wasn't Star Trek to them. But.. this reluctance to change is what plagued every new show going forward initially, yet all of them found their fanbase and eventually all shows ended up being loved by the fans after some time had passed. TNG was just the first show that had to overcome this hurdle, and boy did it succeed in doing that. My take on Encounter at Farpoint: The pilot does a good job at introducing most of the crew and the things the new Enterprise can do. The plot however is a bit lacking. Not bad mind you, but much better things are to come. Even Picard says at the end that most of their coming adventures will probably be way more interesting ;) The Q character is a highlight though, thanks to the quality of John de Lancie's acting. He based his performance on Trelane from TOS in the Episode "The Squire of Gothos". You can probably see some parallels to that episode in this pilot. My questions for you guys: - What is your initial impression of the new crew and which characters are you most curious about, which ones do you think has the greatest potential going forward? - What do you think of the new Enterprise D, both the exterior design and the bridge and other sets? - What did you think of the Q character? - What do you think of the new uniforms and the color switch (command is now red instead of gold, and the former redshirts are now golden) - What did you think of the scene between Data and McCoy?

Andreas Schmitt

The saucer separation scene was clearly to show off the new toys.... and it was pretty damn cool!

James Bottas

DeForest Kelley. Admiral McCoy. What an amazing moment. His comment that Data being an android is ALMOST as bad as being a Vulcan. Alright Bones, alright. Somebody has taken his twitter away for sure lol

James Bottas

Encounter at Farpoint gives TNG something TOS never got, which is an actual episode 1/first mission for the crew! With TOS you go with either The Man Trap, The Cage, or Where No Man Has Gone Before... and all three of those just plop you in mid-adventure with a crew that's already off and running. Here, some of our characters haven't even been aboard the Enterprise yet. So everyone's kind of awkward. Pretty overly formal with one another. If nothing else, it's relatable in that aspect.

James Bottas

Yeah, but holy $#!+ did they over-correct for the new stuff. "This is a sad scene, play the sad piano, even if it's an unearned emotional moment so the audience will kniw they should feel sad." 😝

Nolan

She was always a useless character. "I sense fear", "I sense anxiety", she really had no function militarily speaking. Her job doesn't even make sense as Counselor, anyone can counsel you no matter what their position. Just ask Bones.

Ken R

Thank you for at least editing and tagging the spoilers. Call me selfish, but the more blind they go in, the more enjoyable they are

James Bottas

Encounter at Farpoint has the same issues in pacing as TMP, and for the same reasons. Script stretched out to reach a longer runtime. S1 may be the purest Roddenberry ideal Trek, which many find stilted and dry, and writers found it hard to write in that way, but I think it's great to establish a baseline foundation for this sandbox so that the rules are known enough to bend them without totally breaking them. But S1 has a lot more good eps than people recall. But that's probably cause the season got back loaded with them.

Nolan

The following contains very general comments about some season 1 episodes with nothing that I consider to be spoilers. If you are particularly sensitive to knowing anything about the episodes then do not read the below comments. . . . . “Code of Honor” has a very racially cringey depiction of an alien race. “The Last Outpost” does a terrible job at introducing a new antagonist (later redeemed in Deep Space Nine). “Justice” has some MST3K-worthy depictions of sexy barely legal aliens, and some questionable decisions on the part of the protagonists. “Haven” brings back an old actor in a new role that is controversial, but frankly becomes one of my favorite recurring characters over the run of the series. A lot of people hate this character though. “The Big Goodbye” is the beginning of a new trope that will be repeated throughout TNG, DS9, and Voyager. “Datalore” is one of the first episodes that starts delving deeply into character back stories and introduces a recurring antagonist. “Heart of Glory” is the beginning of a new series of stories to reframe and deepen the lore and backstory of Klingons. “Symbiosis” is possibly my favorite episode of the season and a welcome focus on Dr. Crusher being good at her job. “Skin of Evil” is a travesty for the way it completely botches the departure of a main cast member in a terrible way. After viewing this episode, you should do some reading on the background of how badly this actor was treated by the producers. “Conspiracy” is a strange episode that reveals a vast conspiracy … that is never mentioned again.

Aramis Calcutt

I’ve removed the episode specific comments from the post. But I still disagree that any of them were spoilers. They revealed far less than any “next week on” promo revealed. There were no plot points or revelations about specific events. Instead I’ll post them in a separate reply to this thread with a note.

Aramis Calcutt

Wow, more than half of that shoulda been saved for the relevant episodes. Not direct spoilers persay, but anyone with a brain can probably figure a tone out from this comment. 🤣

Nolan

They specifically asked that future episodes not be touched upon as they're going to read these blind on Monday. Why would you then post an outline of most of the season? You've seen the episodes, we believe you. Now, respectfully, would you please delete the spoilers before it taints the blind watch-through?

James Bottas

Considering their reaction to "The Empath", I'm curious as to what Alex and Josh will make of Deanna Troi in "Encounter at Farpoint".

David Felgate

One thing that's very different about this new generation of Trek shows is the music. TOS had quite a few very memorable themes that would get re-cycled in subsequent episodes, and for me there's quite a bit of nostalgia associated with classic Trek music. Starting with TNG, I've found most of the music to be fairly dull and forgettable, which I believe was mandated by Rick Berman who absolutely hated the bombast of the classic Trek scores. (This does not include the TNG main theme, of course, which was borrowed from the TMP's outstanding soundtrack.)

David Felgate

There are some "off" episodes in S1 and S2, I think the biggest reason is the shift in production in season 3. All the production and writing changes really helped TNG stand on its own away from TOS. The first 2 seasons feel like they could be "TOS 2.0" with the way they are written. Only, and I think this is the big issue for a lot of people, it lacks the chemistry of the big three. There isn't nearly the same level of humor. Gene really wanted TNG to be serious, and "taken seriously." Patrick Stewart has said he felt immense pressure in the first year, and he was unfortunately cold to some of the other actors as a result. If I remember right he even had a blow up at one of the actors, demanding they stop "F*cking about!"

Steven Johnson

Patrick Stewart was the English version of Morgan Freeman for a long time. Always kinda old, but never seeming to get older.

Steven Johnson

Yes, you leave out specifics, but you reveal far too many details about future episodes. Your comments on "Skin of Evil", for example, contain a gigantic spoiler even though you omit the name. Isn't it more fun for all of us if they go into these episodes with as little knowledge and expectations as possible?

Lovok

Clearly everyone has different tastes, but the Enterprise-D remains my favorite looking ship in all of Trek! A very close second is the refit Enterprise from the first three movies.

Lovok

I wouldn’t call them spoilers. They are just very general comments about some of the episodes. I don’t name names or reveal specific plot points.

Aramis Calcutt

Target Audience: Do not read the above comment. Tons of spoilers for the season!

Lovok

I loved the first season of TNG when it was first out and watched episodes repeatedly. The wonderful thing is, it gets better and better as the seasons go on. Watched some of Encounter at Farpoint last night and it’s really strange as they all look so young, even Patrick Stewart.

Paul Rymer

Considering your history with episodes and movies that are supposed to be bad, I think you will really enjoy the first couple of seasons more than everybody thinks. Yes, there are some cringy lines and moments but I was pretty much hooked from the very beginning back when it originally premiered. I think that the later seasons are just so damn good that it makes the first couple of seasons in retrospect look pretty weak, when in fact they are mostly quite enjoyable.

David Wayne Fox

Keep an eye out for Excelsior-class ships in the first few seasons of TNG. It's a nice bit of world-building. The movies with Kirk and crew are set in the 2280's, where the Excelsior is cutting edge Federation technology. TNG is set generally in the 2360's, where the Excelsiors are long past being current technology, but are still very serviceable workhorses.

Timothy Hennon

^This! Stardates make much more intuitive sense in the TNG-era shows (specifically TNG, Deep Space 9, and Voyager). As Nate pointed out, a stardate of 41386.4 would be a 1st-season episode, while a stardate of 44873.2 would be a 4th-season episode. Since it lasted 7 seasons, TNG stardates run roughly from 41000 to 47999. Deep Space 9 premiered about halfway through TNG's 6th season, and lasted 7 seasons of its own, so the DS9 star dates run from about 46500 to 52999. Voyager premiered in January '95 after TNG wrapped up in May of '94, so the Voyager stardates run from about 48500 to 54999. In this case, however, that first digit of 5 does NOT mean "25th century". It simply means that something that happened on stardate 51500 occurred about 6 years after something that happened on stardate 45500.

Timothy Hennon

Freshman year in college when this came out and it didn't hit home with me initially. The effects and early CGI were not great, and knowing the original cast for my entire life caused me not to connect with the new crew until the third season where the show really hits its groove. Time has been kind and there are some good sci-fi stories in there. By season 3 TNG is some of the best sci-fi written, especially for its time.

Stephen Wright

Season 1 and 2 had good points but were overall kind of rough. I really enjoyed Encounter At Farpoint when it was first shown and I still do, even though the on the nose preachiness in some scenes I loved as a kid, I don't like now. Then and now, I saw the characters and foundation of a great series. From the first time I saw them I liked the characters.

Mike Rogers

Aramis Calcutt

With the advent of TNG: the Stardate system has an actual formula that it follows. For encounter at Farpoint, the Stardate is 41153.7 The 4 means its the 24th century. The first 1 indicates what season it is. Then the next three digits are randomly chosen, and increase at random intervals throughout the season. The digit in the tenth place represents the time of day, obviously a different clock than we use. TOS very much does not follow this formula, so the Stardates from TOS can't be reconciled with TNG.

FireBall_IA

I watched this when it first broadcast, after having been a Trek fan from September 8, 1966 on. And there was a lot of the clunkiness of new shows present, but there were definitely hints of what the show would become. The Enterprise D looked a little funky but I got used to it. My mom never did; she called it "The Guppy". Loved the appearance by McCoy. It was a little puzzling that the first A plot out the gate was another "captain vs. a godlike creature" story that seemed to almost exactly mirror "The Squire of Gothos." But it did allow for a lot of Picard character moments. The B plot Farpoint story lets the crew shine. And I really loved the new score!

Blane Mather

I’m about getting ready for my rewatch TNG season 1 does feel the most TOS like of the series. It’s only in S3 does it start finding itself

Scarpad’s Domain

I rewatched Encounter At Farpoint a few weeks ago for the first time in years and enjoyed it more than I thought I would. Granted, some of the performances are a bit clunky and there is tonnes of filler but the premise of the episode is at least interesting. Of course, there is a very significant tonal and aesthetic difference between this and TOS. If Kirk's era can be described as a chaotic mix of the wild-west and the 1960s, then Picard's era can be described as a futuristic version of the 80s and 90s. Everything is more settled, more comfortable and there's a nice carpet on the Enterprise-D bridge. One could even say that Starfleet, the Federation and humans in general have all gotten a little bit too smug in the 24th century, hence the need for Q to show up the way he does. But despite that, there is still a certain charm in all the pomposity and our TNG crew is genuinely sincere in their convictions and earnestness. And then there's the (repurposed TMP) theme tune. God I love this show.

Dion James Pitman

In respect to the whole TNG series, take notes on the Prime directive, and how it becomes a suggestion only...you will get sick of hearing about it.

MrDeadstu

The Pilot movie is really a throwback. Coming hot off the heels of the movies, you'll feel a return to the classic formula. If anything, this feels more old fashioned. Still it's great to see a very different ship with a very different captain. The journey begins again.

Chuck Rice

If the theme music sounds familiar, it's because it's a reworking of the main theme from The Motion Picture. And I'm sure you enjoyed the cameo from a TOS character. There will be a very few others, but I won't say who or when. This and a lot of S1/S2 are about as similar to what the show becomes as what "Where No Man Has Gone Before" is to TOS. Some of it is sort of the same, the rest not so much.

KatWithAttitude

I was 10 when this show premiered. As far back as I can remember, it was TOS reruns around 10pm, and an all-night TOS marathon once or twice a year. Every couple of years there was a ST movie, which was a BIG event! Then in 1986, a few months after seeing The Voyage Home, comes a two hour movie on a Saturday night...it was different, new cast, new ship, but the Enterprise was a beauty and the idea of having ST on new every week was exciting. This was before the Internet, and spoilers were much harder to come by. I'd heard about a new show coming, but only had a vague idea of what it might look like. TNG was a treat!

tyranusfan

Jonathan Frakes recalls on meeting Gene Roddenberry, Gene said; "In the 24th Century, there will be no hunger, and there will be no greed, and all the children will know how to read." Gene, the great bird of the galaxy. He was a dreamer. For better or worse, TNG in season 1 is much like TMP. It's Roddenberry Star Trek in its purest form. Post conventions where the "Evolved human being" notions REALLY took off. It feels like what it is. It is more TOS styled stories, without the chemistry of the TOS cast. It feels off for that very reason. You can hear it some of the earliest dialogue. For people in hindsight who can and have watched the whole show, most of them will probably agree they don't think TNG "really begins" until season 3. I don't agree with people who say that seasons 1 and 2 have nothing to offer. There are some fantastic episodes ahead. There are also some awful CLUNKERS ahead. Gene did not want Encounter at Farpoint to be a two hour movie, initially. According to Rick Berman he told the higher ups to "Go to Hell" and he reluctantly wrote the longer version. Which causes some of the pacing issues. On the flip side, when he did, we got John De Lancie as Q. Not to say anything more without spoiling it, but I'm excited to see the Breaking Bad fans in you go "Is that Jane's dad?!" It sure is. Also, That McCoy cameo, eh? Right in the gut. Say what you will about the pilot, but that scene with Data is *Chef's kiss* perfect. Such a quiet way to pass the torch to... The Next Generation. Let's see what's out there... Engage!

Steven Johnson

I will be intrigued to see how you react to one character in particular. There's a lot of opinions out there about the one named after Roddenberry himself....this'll be interesting.

Elway Simpson

26 episode seaons, 7 seasons, so much Star trek to experience. A lot will be good, moste will be great, some....will be this first season. There are a few episodes I like but man, this will be a ride. Lots of turnover in the writers room, Gene Roddenberry is too stubborn for what he wants in this new show. Actors aren't sure what their characters are yet. Kinda amazing that this show became what it became. There were quite a bit of behind the scenes shenanagins during this new era of trek, especially early on in this show.

Elway Simpson

Given your past issues with God characters in Trek, I am curious your opinion on this one.

CM Waters

Amazing how much the show grows from this seed. There's a barely a character they have figured out at this point. (There's one they arguably don't give enough to do until 36 years later, but three or four members of the main cast become just as iconic as the TOS big 4.)

John M.

I always find it funny that older fans say season 1 and 2 are unwatchable. My 13-year-old daughter and I started watching TNG this year (we're up to season 5 now). I was worried that she would think the first two season were terrible, just based on what I've been condition to believe from the fans all these years. Yes, the seasons have some growing pains, but She LOVED them. Sure, she loves the seasons after even more, but Seasons 1 and 2 are very solid TV. I was twelve when TNG debuted and my Dad was a long time Trekkie. He could not have been more thrilled and loved what they did that first season, but was even more excited about the possibilities of what was to come. You have to understand that there was nothing on tv like TNG at the time, I think a lot of fans really miss the mark on TNG seasons 1 and 2. Hope you enjoy it.

Darien Sills-Evans

Encounter at Farpoint, and the start of TNG. You’re gonna be happy the colorful uniforms are back (look for the crewman in the scant variant). It feels familiar like it’s trying to recapture the feel of TOS, but as you get further into TNG you’ll find it’s begins to be its own thing. Give these characters time to grow and shine in their own, try not to compare them to their TOS counterparts, it’s something of a different time for Starfleet in this era.

Gregory

Data is my absolute favorite Star Trek character

FireBall_IA

Except for a handful of episodes, seasons one and two are practically unwatchable. But TNG begins the golden age of Star Trek which ends with Star Trek Enterprise and many huge fans of TOS find themselves loving this even more than TOS. Have fun, I’m jealous!

Jef Etters

Geezuz ENCOUNTER is wonky. So friggin' melodramatic and student-filmy. Second season is better. It took them almost 50 EPS to get into a groove.

Michael Nemo

Season 1 and some of 2 is regarded as bad. And season 1 is indeed rough. But I expect you guys will like it more than most as with s3 of TOS. In contrast season 3 of TNG is where it finds itself and becomes truely great in mine and many fans eyes.

Karl Dutton

After TOS, every single Star Trek spin-off has a shakey first season. What’s tough for the viewer is gradually easing into this new show when it’s impossible to let go of your personal biases based on the previous show. Many TOS fans HATED TNG when it first began. Many came around, but TNG also birthed new fans who never had seen the adventures of Kirk, Spock and Bones. 6 years later, fans HATED DS9 at its birth. Many now call it the best Star Trek show ever. You will, over these initial episodes, have a nagging feeling that “this doesn’t feel like Star Trek.” And to that Id say it’s yet another classic milestone to feel that way on your Trekkie journey. We’ve all felt that way at the start of a new show. The best thing you can do is let go of pre-conceived notions based on TOS, or comparisons (difficult when both are about a ship called the Enterprise exploring the galaxy). Instead, embrace it as it’s own thing. Plenty of people say “Sean Connery is the best Bond”- maybe, but the Bond franchise has only lasted as long as it has because of the 6 unique flavors 6 actors have brought to their Bond tenure. Star Trek TOS ENDED in 1991 with the final TOS film, after 25 years. That ending…. Was 32 years ago and Star Trek is still going strong.

Stuart Arbury

No takes from me for this one but YEEEES finally!!! I've been waiting for you to get to TNG! can't wait :D

DataDroid