It’s so bizarre to read this in the present, knowing how incredible TNG was, but I get it - the original crew WAS Star Trek to them.

The dedicated fans revived this series in syndication, well after it had gone off the air in 1969, and felt attached to the characters that they had obsessed over between then and the 1980s. Like modern fans, they thought that departure from what they knew would ruin it.

I wish I could go back in time and tell them that TNG is going to rock.

  • @ramble81@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12711 months ago

    “unknown British Shakespearian actor…” Wow, I never thought I’d hear Patrick Stewart described that way.

  • The Picard ManeuverOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    8711 months ago

    It’s also funny that the article suggests that Laforge is the new Spock, and not obviously Data.

    • coehl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3211 months ago

      Yeah, the author was pretty obviously decided on his position and accuracy was an afterthought. But if you check his name, you’ll realize he makes a mean spicy chicken sandwich fwiw

    • @transwarp@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      711 months ago

      If you read the initial material, Data is drastically different. There is no explicit mention of being unemotional, just that he tends to speak more formally. He’s supposed to be more like the Ilia probe than Spock.

      Worf didn’t exist at first, so Geordi the teacher with bionic vision would be the most “other” character. If they’d seen any of the early press material for Phase II, Spock’s replacement there was a very junior officer.

        • @transwarp@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          411 months ago

          The idea was that the Klingons had joined the Federation and we’d see Klingon Starfleet personnel in the background. When they did add Worf, he was to be more frequently Data’s relief than Yar’s.

    • The Picard ManeuverOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1311 months ago

      Yeah, what was revolutionary in the 1960s (humans of all nationalities working together) wouldn’t have been enough in 1987, but I appreciate that it set the groundwork for the series as a whole.

      The acting in TOS is over the top and often silly, but I try to watch it as a product of its time - audiences didn’t really want their shows to have an edge or get deeply philosophical back then, so Roddenberry and team had to sneak that type of stuff in where they could. I have a soft spot for TOS and the campy characters and still think it’s a fun lighthearted watch.

  • @hesusingthespiritbomb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4611 months ago

    I mean let’s be real here they had every right to be concerned. TNG had serious problems in the beginning and had some pretty big flaws even as the show got going. Off the top of my head

    • The first few episodes (besides Q) were straight trash. Even if you take out the ample racism and sexism, they still kinda suck
    • Worf didn’t become a thing until Yar died. He was just kinda there. Also his hair looked ridiculous
    • Riker was half as sexy in terms of looks and a quarter as sexy in terms of personality
    • Picard was a dick. Not firm but fair. A straight up dick.
    • They straight up got rid of crusher for a season
    • The Ferengi were awful. Not like in a “lol what shenanigans is Quark up to now” but in a “TOS Gorn” way
    • @cloudy1999@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2411 months ago

      I’m watching TNG now with someone who’s never seen it before, and that’s making me ‘see’ the show with fresh eyes. The first few episodes are so hard to get through. Some are straight up cringey. Many remember Code of Honor and Last Outpost as being horrible, but Naked Now is awful in its own way. Don’t get me wrong: TNG goes on to be an excellent, culture-defining show. When people talk about how good it is, they’re probably thinking about Measure of a Man, Inner Light, Darmok, and Best of Both Worlds.

      Let me add that DS9, Voyager, and Enterprise got to build on the risks that TNG took. Those shows were more consistently good at their starts.

      • @Ilari@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        The Naked Now was a bizarre choice for such an early episode. It’s the very first one after the premiere, and it’s based on the crew acting out of character – before the audience has had time to learn what their personalities are supposed to be.

    • @nxdefiant@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1211 months ago

      Completely irrelevant to the topic, but my personal head canon is that Janeway admired Worf’s S1 Hair and copied it when she was given Voyager to command.

    • 🇰 🔵 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Riker was half as sexy in terms of looks and a quarter as sexy in terms of personality

      Without any other context, you could easily assume that Riker’s beard is what really made TNG work.

    • @T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      They straight up got rid of crusher for a season

      I believe McFadden was fired, which was why she disappeared for no reason or fanfare.

      TNG had serious problems in the beginning and had some pretty big flaws even as the show got going. Off the top of my head

      You’re not wrong. I think the only main character that really had any development in the first 2 seasons is Dr Pulaski, going from someone completely unfamiliar with Data, and conscious machinery, to being an ardent supporter of his. We had a little but in Data settling into being an emotionless Android trying to learn to be more human, and Geordi becoming Chief Engineer, but they were very minor background tweaks to the characters.

      Everyone else barely changed at all in that time, except for Lt. Yar, who went from being a living breathing person to corpse.

    • Loom In Essence
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      I love the first few episodes, I prefer babyface riker, and I think Dick Picard was a cool badass who I fully support.

      But they should have kept Crusher, and the political conflicts were a ridiculous joke epitomized by the cartoonish ferengi. S3 gave us much better aesthetics and politics (though the new character driven storytelling might be a matter of taste).

      • @WhoRoger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        011 months ago

        Wdym, Burton has a normal photo and the character is named among the others. Stewart’s picture is from a performance, so also different.

        Also funny how you’re complaining about someone not getting named, and you’re just referring to him as a black man.

    • @theangryseal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      811 months ago

      Yeah, who even thought that for a second?

      I grew up with Next Generation first, sitting on my dad’s lap watching the show with him.

      When I first watched TOS I remember seeing Spock and saying, “oh yeah, the original Data”.

      • @T156@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        311 months ago

        Especially since Spock was often described by Bones as being a walking computer, and Data was described as an Android. It would be less of a logical leap than having Geordi be the new Spock.

      • @TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        210 months ago

        I remember thinking, “I don’t wanna watch a Trek without Spock,” and then Data came along and I was hooked.

    • @CeruleanRuin@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Was that part of the marketing at the time, or just some bizarre leap from the author? I’m having a hard time finding any good comparisons between La Forge and Spock. In season 1 Geordi wasn’t even in engineering, let alone the science officer. He was a helmsman, so in that sense more comparable to Sulu or Chekhov, and he certainly doesn’t have anything like the relationship with the captain that Spock did.

      Is it just because he was a recognizable name at the time? It’s just a weird jump to make.

  • Julian
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4111 months ago

    It’s always funny looking back at stuff like this. I remember looking at old articles about Catherine Tate becoming a companion in doctor who and people were furious - and in retrospect not only was she one of the best companions, but that was probably the greatest era of the show.

    • @runjun@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2311 months ago

      Heath Ledger is another classic example. I remember the Internet being so confused and mad about the choice. ‘The 10 Things I Hate About You guy!?’

      • Andy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        I came here to post this. I remember someone insisting it was like casting Gary Coleman as Two-Face.

        Although the response wasn’t as strong, there were fans who were also convinced that Robert Downey Jr. was a poor fit for Tony Stark.

        • @cogman@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          911 months ago

          Iron man was a hail mary by Marvel. Their IP was failing. RDJ was a lucky casting. Given where he was at at the time he was a pretty risky pick. Marvel didn’t really have the budget to be too picky at the time.

          There’s a reason Spiderman is owned by sony and the hulk by universal.

          • Zorque
            link
            fedilink
            311 months ago

            And FF and X-Men by Fox before their acquisition.

        • @T156@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          I remain slightly miffed about how Dr Pulaski, one of the few characters that received any development in TNG S2, was so hated by some fans that it caused to Diane Muldur to swear off of Trek altogether.

          She might not have entirely understood Data to begin with, but she did become better at that later on, a stark contrast to much of the rest of the Federation, which would still be arguing whether he, or his children had personhood, and is the only Starfleet Doctor in RetroTrek to actively take an interest in and engage with her patient’s cultures.

          I can’t envision early Dr Crusher taking part in Worf’s Klingon tea ceremony, for example.

    • @PuppyOSAndCoffee@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1211 months ago

      LOL. The TNG hate was ridiculous, but one other thing - nobody ignores a Star Trek fan better than other fans of Star Trek.

    • @Holzkohlen@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 months ago

      I thought that was a Star Wars thing, but I guess it’s just a thing in general. For reference I like it all, Star Wars, Star Trek, TOS, TNG

  • Nmyownworld
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3411 months ago

    There were Star Trek fans at the time screaming from the rooftops about how TNG would ruin Star Trek. Before TNG even aired. But, there were also Star Trek fans who, while disappointed to not have the TOS crew back, were curious about what TNG was going to bring to the table. And, really happy to have a Star Trek series again. But, “Curious Trekkies Wait to See What’s What with TNG” wasn’t going to sell as many papers and stir up as much drama.

    • @SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      7
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      “Bad Trek is better than no Trek” was the begrudging opinion of TOS fans for the first season of TNG.

      • Nmyownworld
        link
        fedilink
        English
        511 months ago

        Lol. That was it. I’m glad TNG had more seasons, getting better and better as time went on.

    • Altima NEO
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Wasnt it 20 years later too? I mean the og crew probably didn’t want to come back

      • Nmyownworld
        link
        fedilink
        English
        411 months ago

        Yeah. The TOS cast did movies, but there’s a difference between doing a film and doing a weekly series. TOS was comfort viewing, and fans were going to fan in wanting more of the same.

    • @TrustingZebra@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      There were Star Trek fans at the time screaming from the rooftops about how TNG would ruin Star Trek.

      Is this what people had to do to spread their word before the internet?

    • Match!!
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 months ago

      Well, they probably have one point - how many modern Trek fans have even watched TOS?

        • AngrilyEatingMuffins
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I’ve seen maybe a quarter of the episodes. Seen every other trek episode multiple times. I know it’s blasphemy but trek got a lot better post Roddenberry

        • v_krishna
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          1985, TNG was definitely my introduction, really even Voyager and then got into TNG from there. I haven’t seen more than a couple TOS episodes but have seen everything else (except the animated ones, and many of the old movies barely watched once)

      • Nmyownworld
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        A lot, I think. At the time of TNG’s initial broadcast, TOS was omnipresent in syndication. And outside of TAS, the only Star Trek series at the time. Star Trek fans watched the heck out of TOS. Then, the Star Trek movies with the TOS cast. The first four films were released before TNG first aired.

        • Match!!
          link
          fedilink
          English
          511 months ago

          Friend, I hate to say this, but TNG aired 35 years ago…

          • Nmyownworld
            link
            fedilink
            English
            211 months ago

            I’m aware. So is the newspaper article this post is about.

  • @scarabic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2511 months ago

    I’ll bet that any TOS fans who were furious at the time probably did not go on to like the show. If they were looking for that witty love/hate triangle of Spock/Kirk/McCoy they didn’t get it.

    But as the name suggests, TNG reached a totally new generation of fans. American culture had changed a LOT between these two shows and anyone attached to the old one was either old themselves or hooked on reruns.

    TNG didn’t slap big right away, either. It took time to get good and find its audience. But I’m so glad they succeeded.

    I say all this to point out that angry fans weren’t actually wrong. The Trek they knew was never coming back. It became a whole other thing for a whole other group of people.

    The difference between this and, say, the Star Wars sequels is that those sequels disappointed fans AND failed to find a new audience that was just as dedicated and even larger.

    People like to use this article to show that angry fans are just idiots- always there and usually wrong. But the TNG miracle hasn’t been repeated many times, if ever, by any of these other franchise rehashes that a Hollywood has shoved out to grab for cash.

    • @BlinkAndItsGone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I’ll bet that any TOS fans who were furious at the time probably did not go on to like the show.

      As a TOS fan who wasn’t too happy with what I had heard before TNG came out, I would bet against you. Most of them probably became TNG fans eventually, because the most impactful thing a show can do is simply to be great. Canon complaints and complaints about characters not returning are mostly about nostalgia, and if the show is compelling (especially if it’s compelling in a similar way to the old show), nostalgia can’t compete. If anything I’d guess that the people in this article were more likely to become fans of TNG, because it would have exceeded their expectations, which can make things seem better than they would otherwise.

  • @BlinkAndItsGone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    17
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Were you really a Trekkie if you thought TNG was going to be good in 1987?

    Kidding, sort of. I remember thinking it was going to be a cash grab, and I still think I was right to think so at the time. Keep in mind, you couldn’t go on the Web and instantly know everything about an upcoming TV show. I think I learned it was in production from the back of a cereal box. I didn’t even know Gene Roddenberry was involved. The Enterprise-D design was pretty weird, and the cast of characters was more than a bit out there–a Klingon? On the Enterprise crew? Come on.

    • @LedgeDrop@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1011 months ago

      As a kid, I saw a contest on a box of cheerios(?) where you could be an child extra in one of the first TNG episodes. So for most of the first season, I sincerely thought Wil Wheaton/Wesley was the winner.

      Anyway, the first few episodes during season 1 were not great, but I was content to finally get some new material. I’m glad TNG had enough time to “find its own groove”.

        • Siliconic
          link
          fedilink
          English
          511 months ago

          Well, he didn’t have much of an acting career after TNG. I would highly recommend Wil Wheaton’s book Still Just A Geek that he just published a few months ago, I’ve been listening to the audiobook (read by Wheaton) and it’s really good, and there’s some stuff that’s “exclusive” to the audio version (stuff he thought of as he was reading it again lol)

    • @MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      It’s fair to have expected TNG to be a cash grab. I’m sure TNG was a cash grab among all the other things it was. We all want to get paid, after all. I’m just glad it turned out to be so much more as well.

      I’m reminded of the letters page of Aquaman in the issue after he lost his hand.

      “To those of you saying we did it for the shock value, we have this to say for ourselves: we sure didn’t do it for the boredom value.”

  • @Asymptote@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1711 months ago

    If you’ve seen the original Battlestar Galactica you’ll know why they were worried.

    Only good thing about that show was that in space, bras were unpopular.

    • GratefullyGodless
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      That’s because, according to renown space expert George Lucas, wearing a bra in space would strangle the wearer, which is why Princess Leia jiggled her way around the Death Star. So, it’s not that they were unpopular, just that they were a safety issue.

      • @AEsheron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        411 months ago

        I mean, she wasn’t jiggling. Carrie had often complained about how tightly bound she was, he specifically didn’t want that look either. Nothing at all in that outfit would have honestly made a huge difference in how the whole thing felt I think, at least in hindsight it would really cheapen it.