Sign in to follow this  
adamclark83

Season 3 - What Made it So Good?

Recommended Posts

TNG really took off during season 3 but I've been wondering, what made it so? Since Michael Piller came on board as script editor, was there more emphasis on character?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm perhaps not that qualified to answer since seasons 2 and 1 are my favorites BUT season 3 comes right after them on my list, so, maybe I can say something after all...

First of all, season 3 has some really brilliant episodes from the beginning. "Who Watches The Watchers" or "The Survivors" come to mind. These episodes focused more on moral issues than firing phasers and caused you to wonder how you would react in similar situations. Episodes like these two are rare in seasons 1 and 2, especially in season 1, which basically has the characters stumble through space without knowing what the hell they're actually doing. Season 1 even has a very un-TNG episode with "Conspiracy" in which an alien race is basically exterminated. (They ARE a threat, but I doubt that an episode like this would've been written into season 3.) In season 3, we get episodes like "Evolution", in which an alien race is CREATED by accident and poses a threat BUT it is being TALKED to and reasoned with. (Okay, a similar idea was done in season 1's "Home Soil", but still, "Evolution" takes the thing a bit further AND it focuses more on the issues behind the whole thing instead of the crew standing around and staring a flashing thing in sickbay for hours.)

Then you get episodes like "The Enemy" and "The Defector" that feature the Romulans very heavily and still manage to hold up to the show's tone - Jean-Luc is reluctant to start an actual phaser/torpedo fight with them and fights on a more sneaky basis instead, which fits his character very well. Speaking of major aliens... we also get the brilliant Klingon episode "Sins Of The Father" in which we learn more about Worf as a character (they tried it in "Heart Of Glory" but that one was more about Klingons in general than about Worf himself and it never took us to 'the first city of the Klingon Imperial Empire') and about how Klingons live these days in the 24th century. They touched on this with "The Emissary" and "A Matter Of Honor" in season 2 as well, sure, but "Sins Of The Father" is really about Klingon life and what it means to be a Klingon AND, Klingon politics that, as we are made to notice, are much more complex than 'death to the Romulans'. And then there's the Borg and "The Best of Both Worlds, Part I" as a season's final episode and one hell of a cliffhanger, I don't think I need to elaborate on why THAT one's brilliant.

Sarek makes a guest appearance in this season as well, and it's always nice to have TOS characters on TNG, especially someone as well-liked as Sarek. That helped, too - as did Mark Lenard's brilliant acting, of course.

In general... season 3 is more detailed than seasons 1 and 2. It focuses more on moral debates and many of the episodes are slow-paced and allow the viewer to develop their own thoughts and opinions on the issues that are presented. Season 1 in particular is very TOS-ish with its approach, things happen very quickly and they often don't make a lot of sense either and the characters have to find themselves first, which mirrors the actors and their dilemma - they had to develop a relationship with their characters as well first, and it took them a while to do so. Season 2 is more detailed and the characters are beginning to evolve, the actors are getting more and more comfortable and everyone gets a real job to do (LaForge becomes the chief engineer and Worf is finally and officially Head of Security, reflected by the change in uniform color). In season 3 most of the characters are sufficiently "stable" - and that's where the real writing can begin. Also, I recall that Sir Patrick asked for a change in Jean-Luc's character. (One I do not fully approve of, at least not when it comes to stupid episodes like "Captain's Holiday", THAT one is a season 3 episode that was SO NOT NECESSARY if you ask me, but that's just me and my biased opinion.) That one might have helped a bit, too - Jean-Luc becomes a bit more relaxed and gets funny scenes like the one in which he pwns the Sheliak (a favorite moment of mine) and he gets to smile a bit more often and also gets to kick some butt from time to time - considering the fact that a Trek series can both rise and fall with its captain, a step that was perhaps vital to the success of season 3 as well. I for one would have preferred it for him to remain his grumpy season 2 self, but I do realize that they HAD to add a bit more to his character. I just think SOME of the things they did weren't exactly... wise, but I agree that a few aspects HAD to be done. (The fact that the whole thing completely de-railed into out of character nonsense in the movies after First Contact is for another debate - for season 3 the change made sense in most regards.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammer   

Season 1 had more than it's fair share of the worst episodes of the series; The Naked Now (bad TOS ripoff, Data gets drunk? Wesley saves the day!), Code of Honor (racist and sexist), Justice (solved too easily with a Picard speech to the god of the planet, prime directive ignored), Skin of Evil (Troi reduced to damsel in distress, a weak way to kill off a main character), Angel One (sexist and not interesting to watch), When the Bough Breaks (Wesley saves the day!), all come to mind as mediocre to abysmal.

The first season felt TOS-like, but that's not a complement. It's not like the good TOS episodes, more like the mediocre TOS episodes. I felt Crosby was miscast as security chief, and Worf was given little to do aside from 'Heart of Glory'. Dr Crusher strongly hints that Wesley is Picard's son (when Wesley visits the bridge, Beverly mentions to Picard how long it had been since.... trails off) , and that Picard and Crusher had a love interest (they try to discretely get away from the rest on the holodeck in The Big Goodbye) but this was later ignored. The only Troi episode she got was 'Haven', which was weak. Engineering was run by a rotating crew of extras until they settled on Geordi. The Ferengi are introduced as a major villain in 'The Last Outpost' in an otherwise very TOS-like episode, and aren't taken seriously by the viewers.

The second season, well a lot of time was wasted. They brought in Pulaski, and spent several episodes developing her character, only to have her leave at the end of the season and never seen or mentioned again. Whether you liked her as an actress more than McFadden, liked the writing for her character more than the hatchet job they did on Crusher, it's hard to deny that plenty of time was wasted developing a character that could have been spent on other characters. It was also an odd decision to keep Wesley around with his mother gone.

Season 2 overall was moderately better than season 1, but still had some stinkers. Probably the worst episode in the entire run, Samaritan Snare, occurs in season 2. Important points are raised in the episode by Troi and Worf, but aren't addressed. The entire crew seemed lobotomized. In the shuttlecraft, Wesley asks 'Was that before the Klingons joined the Federation?' Picard 'That's right.' What?! Picard's surgery conveniently goes wrong to build tension, and the Enterprise swoops in just in time for Pulaski to save the day. Shades of Grey probably comes in at 2nd worst being a clip show. Up the Long Ladder stereotyped the Irish, and had a moronic story to boot. Oh, you'll all have to practice polygamy! Why not just bring in a colony ship or something? Ridiculous.

On the bright side, at least it did have episodes like 'The measure of a man', an important character development episode for Data. 'Elementary, Dear Data' was another good episode for Data and Geordi, helping to develop the friendship between the two. 'Q Who' introduced the Borg, a main villain for the entire series.

The third season though featured some of the best episodes of the series, including classics like 'Yesterday's Enterprise' and the first part of 'The best of both worlds'. There were a couple of weaker episodes, but none were among the worst of TNG's run like during Seasons 1 and 2. I thought that character development was done much better. Season 3 just didn't have the script problems that plagued the first 2 seasons. It seemed like they stopped trying to emulate TOS and were standing alone as their own series.

Edited by Hammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to the question? Many elements come to mind. Seasons 1 and 2 were kind of a painful rebirth of ST on television, but by S3 a lot of the bugs had been worked out. But the changes that come to mind are these:

* The cinematography and lighting were drastically changed; gone was the dark, heavy contrast, shadow-lit look of seasons 1,2. In was a softer, more intimate look. More color was introduced as well; less of the dull earth tones that defined the earlier years. Made for a better looking show overall...

* More emphasis on character over dull, heavy-handed scifi machinations. Many episodes (but not all, of course) of the first two seasons made the crew more passive observers to outsiders and their problems rather than confronting situations that affected them personally. Helping the Bringloidi wild Irishmen and the other uptight colony come together in "Up the Long Ladder" or helping the drug dealers/addicts of "Symbiosis", etc. In season three, it felt more personal; Data makes a daughter, Picard is kidnapped by the Borg, Sarek mind-melds with Picard, Geordi falls in love on the holodeck, etc. The episodes revolved around OUR characters; not outsiders or "Mary Sues." Each episode of S3 seemed to revolve around a new member of the ensemble every week, giving every character a fair shot at growth and development. Even minor characters came into their own for a change....

* Jettisoning some of the junk of prior years and starting fresh; Picard's ill-ease with Wesley for example, was largely abandoned. As was Riker's bad relationship with his dad, Troi's overacting at every new emotion she sensed, the Pakleds (?!?) and some of the other random stuff that didn't stick.

* Better writing overall; less tin-eared dialogue such as "Vicious animal things" "A god-thing" "Shut up Wesley" "Don't! If you should be hurt..." and other 'gems' of the earlier years. The new dialogue had a less awkward ring to it; more natural sounding.

* New uniforms; gone were the ugly, one piece Dr. Denton jumpers of seasons 1,2. The two-piece uniforms (despite the occasional need for a 'picard maneuver') were a lot more forgiving if the actors had a heavy lunch that day. Too bad the women were still stuck with the jumpers, though....

* Episodes such as "Yesterday's Enterprise" "The Offspring" "Best Of Both Worlds" "Sarek" and others were not only good TNG, but they propelled the new show into a level of quality on a par with the movies and TOS. It was ALL considered Star Trek now; not just TOS and it's ugly duckling spinoff. There were still some weaker episodes now and then ("Matter Of Perspective" "Transfigurations") but on the whole? The energy and focus on characters made this season almost feel like a first season of a new show....

Those are my thoughts on what made TNG season 3 a cut above the first two. Now, if only Pulaski had stayed aboard.... ;)

Edited by Sehlat Vie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zef'No   

TNG really took off during season 3 but I've been wondering, what made it so? Since Michael Piller came on board as script editor, was there more emphasis on character?

I'm not really a fan of Season Three. I liked Seasons One and Two, they each had a unique charm. Season Three on the other hand was uncomfortably an "in between" season, not quite the charm of the first two, but not achieving the heights of the later seasons.

Obviously there were some improvements. The writing got better; stories had more of a pace, were more realistic, consistent, and had less of the over-the-top melodrama than before (but the old problems still persisted and it wasn't until the next season that they got the formula right).

Season Three did however contain some really bad episodes. I disagree with Mr. Picard here, I thought the first half dozen or so episodes were really boring. The season certainly got off to a slow start, but did get better as it went on.

The Price was the first one that I could cite as a decent episode, but it certainly had its problems.

The Defector was probably the first that I could call "good"; the dramatic tension was a welcome change from the mundane drudgery of the preceding episodes.

The Hunted was also good drama, and Deja Q provided some comedic moments, seeing Q is always fun.

Yesterday's Enterprise was good, although you could tell it had been rushed and cobbled together by way too many different people. If they had taken more time over it, it could really been excellent, but I understand they were limited by Whoopi Goldberg's availability.

The Offspring is a great Data episode.

Sins of the Father is the first episode that really starts to establish the Klingons (and Worf) that we know and love. It introduces a nice (and unfortunately rare) story arc that would play over several subsequent episodes.

Allegiance, Captian's Holiday, Hollow Pursuits and Menage a Troi all had some fun moments. The introduction of Barclay was a good move.

Sarek was good to have a connection with TOS and The Best of Both Worlds remains an iconic classic.

Personally, I would say TNG didn't really "take off" until Season Four. Seasons one through three all felt somewhat hit-and-miss. You get a good episode every now and then, but a lot of mediocre ones in between. You can see them experimenting as they went, working out what worked and what didn't, getting the right people in the right places and so on. - And all of this is both necessary and good. It allowed them to achieve (almost) perfection in the latter seasons. It's a shame that Voyager (for example) didn't seem to do this, they just rigidly stuck to the same thing for 7 years, never trying something new to see if it worked and never progressing or improving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm perhaps not that qualified to answer since seasons 2 and 1 are my favorites BUT season 3 comes right after them on my list, so, maybe I can say something after all...

First of all, season 3 has some really brilliant episodes from the beginning. "Who Watches The Watchers" or "The Survivors" come to mind. These episodes focused more on moral issues than firing phasers and caused you to wonder how you would react in similar situations. Episodes like these two are rare in seasons 1 and 2, especially in season 1, which basically has the characters stumble through space without knowing what the hell they're actually doing. Season 1 even has a very un-TNG episode with "Conspiracy" in which an alien race is basically exterminated. (They ARE a threat, but I doubt that an episode like this would've been written into season 3.) In season 3, we get episodes like "Evolution", in which an alien race is CREATED by accident and poses a threat BUT it is being TALKED to and reasoned with. (Okay, a similar idea was done in season 1's "Home Soil", but still, "Evolution" takes the thing a bit further AND it focuses more on the issues behind the whole thing instead of the crew standing around and staring a flashing thing in sickbay for hours.)

Then you get episodes like "The Enemy" and "The Defector" that feature the Romulans very heavily and still manage to hold up to the show's tone - Jean-Luc is reluctant to start an actual phaser/torpedo fight with them and fights on a more sneaky basis instead, which fits his character very well. Speaking of major aliens... we also get the brilliant Klingon episode "Sins Of The Father" in which we learn more about Worf as a character (they tried it in "Heart Of Glory" but that one was more about Klingons in general than about Worf himself and it never took us to 'the first city of the Klingon Imperial Empire') and about how Klingons live these days in the 24th century. They touched on this with "The Emissary" and "A Matter Of Honor" in season 2 as well, sure, but "Sins Of The Father" is really about Klingon life and what it means to be a Klingon AND, Klingon politics that, as we are made to notice, are much more complex than 'death to the Romulans'. And then there's the Borg and "The Best of Both Worlds, Part I" as a season's final episode and one hell of a cliffhanger, I don't think I need to elaborate on why THAT one's brilliant.

Sarek makes a guest appearance in this season as well, and it's always nice to have TOS characters on TNG, especially someone as well-liked as Sarek. That helped, too - as did Mark Lenard's brilliant acting, of course.

In general... season 3 is more detailed than seasons 1 and 2. It focuses more on moral debates and many of the episodes are slow-paced and allow the viewer to develop their own thoughts and opinions on the issues that are presented. Season 1 in particular is very TOS-ish with its approach, things happen very quickly and they often don't make a lot of sense either and the characters have to find themselves first, which mirrors the actors and their dilemma - they had to develop a relationship with their characters as well first, and it took them a while to do so. Season 2 is more detailed and the characters are beginning to evolve, the actors are getting more and more comfortable and everyone gets a real job to do (LaForge becomes the chief engineer and Worf is finally and officially Head of Security, reflected by the change in uniform color). In season 3 most of the characters are sufficiently "stable" - and that's where the real writing can begin. Also, I recall that Sir Patrick asked for a change in Jean-Luc's character. (One I do not fully approve of, at least not when it comes to stupid episodes like "Captain's Holiday", THAT one is a season 3 episode that was SO NOT NECESSARY if you ask me, but that's just me and my biased opinion.) That one might have helped a bit, too - Jean-Luc becomes a bit more relaxed and gets funny scenes like the one in which he pwns the Sheliak (a favorite moment of mine) and he gets to smile a bit more often and also gets to kick some butt from time to time - considering the fact that a Trek series can both rise and fall with its captain, a step that was perhaps vital to the success of season 3 as well. I for one would have preferred it for him to remain his grumpy season 2 self, but I do realize that they HAD to add a bit more to his character. I just think SOME of the things they did weren't exactly... wise, but I agree that a few aspects HAD to be done. (The fact that the whole thing completely de-railed into out of character nonsense in the movies after First Contact is for another debate - for season 3 the change made sense in most regards.)

All that, and you didn't even mention the Sheliak ;)

Edit: Nevermind, you did sneak them in somewhere :giggle:

Edited by Starblind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seasons 3 and 6 are my personal favorites.

They're the only full seasons of TNG I have on DVD, in fact. I have some of the 'collection sets' (the Picard, Borg and Klingon sets) but for full seasons of TNG? I only own 3 & 6. Seasons 4 and 5 had some great moments too (7 only had 3 that I liked at all), but 3 was the game changer for me. It's when the show finally found it's voice out from under the shadow of the movies or TOS. I watched 1 and 2 primarily because they had the ST label and because I kept hoping they would improve (season 2 is an improvement over 1, but that's not saying much IMO).

Season 3 was the first season of TNG that I watched because I genuinely enjoyed it.... :thumbup:

Edited by Sehlat Vie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What made s3 better is what made the films better. Roddenberry's lack of direct input. Blasphemy i know, but i always been one to think of Gene Roddenberry as a man with great ideas, but with lots of great ways to screw them up. Especially as he got older.

Also, Michael Piller. (still think he did a great job with Insurrection, the writing isn't whats bad) His involvment helped greatly. I think also David Carson being added to the directing cast helped. (Despite what people think of Generations, It had great directing.)

The change in music. Season 1 and 2 were full of cheesy over the top music cues. In my opinion season 3 had the best music of all 7 seasons.

The change in uniforms. They look more like uniforms. They looked less professional without collars. (I was glad when odo got his collar in DS9.)

Still cant believe no one wanted to torch a amt model kit to show battle damage on the enterprise d in yesterdays enterprise and best of both worlds. I hope they show some battle damage in the blu ray remasters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammer   

What made s3 better is what made the films better. Roddenberry's lack of direct input. Blasphemy i know, but i always been one to think of Gene Roddenberry as a man with great ideas, but with lots of great ways to screw them up. Especially as he got older.

I've heard that a lot of the first season scripts like Skin of Evil had major re-writes by Roddenberry, and subsequently turned into stinkers. When you think about it, it's actually pretty easy to pick out the episodes in which Roddenberry decided to re-write, his writing style is unmistakable.

Roddenberry and Lucas are kind of similar this way, both were great at creating an interesting universe (or galaxy) with interesting concepts and alien species. However, neither were good when it came down to details like writing scripts or developing characters. Worse, neither of them could bring themselves to admit this, and both did damage to their respective franchises. Sure, Roddenberry did some good work on TOS, but there were a lot of weak episodes that can be pinned on writing in there too. (season 3 doesn't count because he had left for other projects by then) TOS's cult status inflated Roddenberry's ego until TNG took off, and then he suggested that TAS and even TOS shouldn't be considered cannon. Lucas rested on his laurels when creating the prequel trilogy, and it shows.

Sure, Paramount didn't exactly handle the legacy well when it came to spinoffs. DS9 had it's fans but suffered low ratings. Same problem with Voyager, except weak character development is added onto that and lacked an overall story arc. Enterprise was for the most part a train wreck. However, the meat of the TNG series and the first two TNG movies and Star Trek VI were handled well by the studio. I guess the key is to come up with a creative universe, and find a studio that knows how to bring that vision to life, while resisting the urge to meddle in the process.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What made s3 better is what made the films better. Roddenberry's lack of direct input. Blasphemy i know, but i always been one to think of Gene Roddenberry as a man with great ideas, but with lots of great ways to screw them up. Especially as he got older.

I've heard that a lot of the first season scripts like Skin of Evil had major re-writes by Roddenberry, and subsequently turned into stinkers. When you think about it, it's actually pretty easy to pick out the episodes in which Roddenberry decided to re-write, his writing style is unmistakable.

Roddenberry and Lucas are kind of similar this way, both were great at creating an interesting universe (or galaxy) with interesting concepts and alien species. However, neither were good when it came down to details like writing scripts or developing characters. Worse, neither of them could bring themselves to admit this, and both did damage to their respective franchises. Sure, Roddenberry did some good work on TOS, but there were a lot of weak episodes that can be pinned on writing in there too. (season 3 doesn't count because he had left for other projects by then) TOS's cult status inflated Roddenberry's ego until TNG took off, and then he suggested that TAS and even TOS shouldn't be considered cannon. Lucas rested on his laurels when creating the prequel trilogy, and it shows.

Agreed.

If you watch Gene Roddenberry's failed pilots ('suffered through them' might be more a more apt description)? You'd see how many of his ideas were really BAD ones. I've seen "Genesis II" "Earth 2"(it's remake/sequel) and "Spectre." They were so bad that I can totally sympathize with the network for passing on them. Even his most lauded one, "The Questor Tapes" is laughably bad in spots (the ending is AWFUL, too). It's almost a miracle that Star Trek was as good as it was (a tribute to Gene Coon, John Meredith Lucas, Dorothy Fontana and many others).

Ditto with George Lucas; he's made a few really great movies (literally just a few; "American Graffiti" "THX-1138" and "Star Wars" [1977]), but when left to his own devices for too long? His original ideas lose their edge and his worst creative/artistic impulses are brought to the forefront. The one SW movie where he had the least involvement, The Empire Strikes Back, is also (not coincidentally) the best of the bunch.

Roddenberry started to lose it when he began to treat the ST philosophy as sort of a quasi-religion; his odd belief that man is perfectible (a bit of a Nomad complex on his part, IMO), or his stubbornly misguided belief that technology will solve ALL of our problems (in reality, a technological leap such as warp drive would probably ignite WW3 rather than cure us from it's aftermath; countries would want to weaponize it ASAP). Despite his being an agnostic, his ST got a bit of course when he began to BELIEVE that his quasi-religious philosophy for the show was a genuine template for the future (he espoused it over and over at conventions before his death, almost like an L. Ron Hubbard figure). His belief that by the 24th century, there will be no greed, no hunger, no war, no poverty, etc. feels hopelessly naive today. The first seasons of the show were Roddenberry trying to put that philosophy into practice; the characters were boring, perfect archetypes whose only drama came from primitive or less-enlightened 'outworlders.' By season three (when Roddenberry's role became less active) things began to change and the shows characters began to breathe for the first time. It's like they were literally holding in their stomachs for the first two years (with those uniforms, they probably HAD to). By seasons 4-7, they even had good ol' fashioned flaws like us normal folk! Sadly, Berman began to espouse the 'religion' of Roddenberry after the 'great bird's' death and some of those 'perfected humanity' ideas ("Oh, our people wouldn't DO that") began to seep back into the formula again. Luckily, because of either lack of interest or it's relatively low ratings, DS9 was largely left alone (and, like Empire Strikes Back, it is IMO the most dramatically successful of the bunch).

Sometimes one person (Roddenberry, Lucas) can give birth to something wonderful, but it takes a really strong set of parents to bring it into healthy, strong, confident adolescence....

Edited by Sehlat Vie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammer   

The funny thing is, Lucas has always been back-handed towards Empire Strikes Back.

Entertainment blogger David Poland recalls Lucas’ comment on Wednesday at the Publicist’s Guild luncheon: “George Lucas, giving the award to Sid Ganis, who was the in-house publicist on Star Wars: Episode Five – The Empire Strikes Back, said, ‘Sid is the reason why The Empire Strikes Back is always written about as the best of the films, when it actually was the worst one.’”

Yes, Lucas is actually that clue-less. No wonder the prequels were terrible, he didn't know what his audience wanted. His ego can't allow himself to recognize V as the best of the bunch. I'm actually glad he sold the rights to Disney, they certainly can't do any worse.

As for the utopian view of the future, it was often awkwardly parroted by Picard when he was trying to take the moral high ground on the less-enlightened out-worlders like you said, or to scold a thawed human from the 80's that wanted to check on his stock portfolio in 'The Neutral Zone'. In 'The Price', the concept of currency was foreign to Picard. By the time DS9 rolled around, and even in the latter part of TNG, this view was abandoned. In Season 7 for example, Riker settles a debt Quark owed him from gambling in exchange for info.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The funny thing is, Lucas has always been back-handed towards Empire Strikes Back.

Entertainment blogger David Poland recalls Lucas’ comment on Wednesday at the Publicist’s Guild luncheon: “George Lucas, giving the award to Sid Ganis, who was the in-house publicist on Star Wars: Episode Five – The Empire Strikes Back, said, ‘Sid is the reason why The Empire Strikes Back is always written about as the best of the films, when it actually was the worst one.’”

Yes, Lucas is actually that clue-less. No wonder the prequels were terrible, he didn't know what his audience wanted. His ego can't allow himself to recognize V as the best of the bunch. I'm actually glad he sold the rights to Disney, they certainly can't do any worse.

As for the utopian view of the future, it was often awkwardly parroted by Picard when he was trying to take the moral high ground on the less-enlightened out-worlders like you said, or to scold a thawed human from the 80's that wanted to check on his stock portfolio in 'The Neutral Zone'. In 'The Price', the concept of currency was foreign to Picard. By the time DS9 rolled around, and even in the latter part of TNG, this view was abandoned. In Season 7 for example, Riker settles a debt Quark owed him from gambling in exchange for info.

Wow. :huh2:

Lucas was really clueless, wasn't he?!? If "Empire" was the 'worst' of the bunch to him, then maybe Jar Jar and "Yippee" were part of his original vision all along. This is one of the rare occasions when it is absolutely RIGHT to snatch the work right out of the artist's hands....

And yes, ST's 'perfect people' of TNG got a bit more humanized after Roddenberry's death. The perfect example for me was in the movie "First Contact" during the conference room scene between Lily and Picard. Picard tries to convince Lily that his motives for hating the Borg are more 'evolved' and that his humanity no longer succumbs to revenge. To which Lily gives him the response that is exactly what the audience knows to be true, "BULLS**T."

Many have also said that Roddenberry was sort of a template for the movies' Cochrane as well. A boorish, drunken (but brilliant) skirt-chaser whose myth and reputation grew into near cult-status; almost forming a quasi-religion (especially after his death; with each new ST writer/producer all saying, "I think it's very much in keeping with Roddenberry's vision, blah, blah, blah..."). I love Cochrane's line, "I don't wanna be a statue!" :P

Edited by Sehlat Vie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the episode 'The Most Toys' can someone confirm whether at the beginning of the episode on the DVDs, Data was communicating his return to the Enterprise before the shuttle blew up, on the Blu ray this is missing until Geordi goes over them?

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this