ATTENTION: The Boards will be closed permanently on May 28th, 2014. Posting will be disabled on April 28th, 2014. More Info

Why is TNG generally the most popular Star Trek Series?

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 2:43 pm

Can someone explain that to me? Don't get me wrong, I love all of Star Trek and all of the Trek series.


But I do prefer DS9, VOY and ENT over TNG.


The reason being is because Deep Space Nine, Voyager and Enterprise are much more structured and has more of a plotline than TOS or TNG.


And yes I know many would say that the plot of both TOS and TNG is to boldly go where no one has gone before.


But TOS and TNG are most of the time, just so random and just all over the place.


 


DS9 has a more clear plot and clear story it's trying to tell. The Federation trying to bring Bajor into the Federation, and to guard the wormhole, and fight the Dominion.


 


Voyager is even more clear, lost in the Delta Quadrent and try to find a way home.


 


Enterprise is also clear, the first humans out in space, with a new starship exploring new space, but also their mission is to work with the Vulcans, and protect earth from The Xindi, and deal with Daniels and the Temporal Cold War.


 


TOS and TNG, just mostly has random stand alone episodes that have nothing to do with eachother from one episode to the next in most cases.


As I said, I do like TOS and TNG, but I don't understand why those two series are most fans first choice for best Star Trek series?

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 3:16 pm

TNG was more watched than any other series. Most people havent seen ds9, voy and ent

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 3:32 pm

Quote: UNTRugby @ Nov. 26 2010, 3:16 pm

TNG was more watched than any other series. Most people havent seen ds9, voy and ent


Really? I always thought TOS was more watched. But I never understood why DS9, VOY and ENT were not watched as much? Do you know why?

Live Long and Prosper

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 4:31 pm

Just because TNG and TOS were more "episodic" doesn't mean that they were lower qualityu or less structured, as you've indicated.

TNG was much fresher than the other spin-offs. DS9 through ENT were all copies-of-a-copy.

It is what it is. It's the law of diminishing returns. Each successive series seemed more and more stale.

I AM KEE-ROCK!!

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 4:53 pm

Quote: Sora @ Nov. 26 2010, 3:32 pm

Quote: UNTRugby @ Nov. 26 2010, 3:16 pm

TNG was more watched than any other series. Most people havent seen ds9, voy and ent
Really? I always thought TOS was more watched. But I never understood why DS9, VOY and ENT were not watched as much? Do you know why?


When TNG came out most people only had / watched the 3 broadcast channels. So there wasnt a lot of choices of what to watch.

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 5:05 pm

I also think that TNG came out when the audiences were most hungry for a new series. TVH had just knocked the ball out of the park in theaters, and the mid-late 80's were Trek's time.

DS9 came along and (rightfully so) was very different. It was darker, and more conflict driven. It was set on a space station and not on a starship. I think (UNFORTUNATELY) that it worked against the series during the first 2 seasons, and some more casual viewers dropped off before the show really hit its stride.

VOY and ENT were more "TNG" copies. Even though they had interesting premises, the characters were mroe derivitive and the writing started to get stale. More sci-fi options were available, and the sensibilities of those shows never really progressed. As a result, they were not as popular.

I AM KEE-ROCK!!

UNTRugby

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1212

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 5:19 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ Nov. 26 2010, 5:05 pm

DS9 came along and (rightfully so) was very different. It was darker, and more conflict driven. It was set on a space station and not on a starship. I think (UNFORTUNATELY) that it worked against the series during the first 2 seasons, and some more casual viewers dropped off before the show really hit its stride.


also cable, fox, and the internet gave people more entertainment options

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 7:16 pm

That's all true and makes sense. Makes me wonder if TNG would've been very popular had their been more than those 3 stations and more sci-fi out there, and all the internet entertainment.

Live Long and Prosper

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 7:34 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ Nov. 26 2010, 4:31 pm

Just because TNG and TOS were more "episodic" doesn't mean that they were lower qualityu or less structured, as you've indicated. TNG was much fresher than the other spin-offs. DS9 through ENT were all copies-of-a-copy. It is what it is. It's the law of diminishing returns. Each successive series seemed more and more stale.


I have to respectfully disagree with you. I found DS9, through Enterprise to be fresh and exciting and to have new ideas. And yes there's similarities in all the series, but there's supposed to be isn't there? Seeing as how they're all centered in the same universe.

DS9 was definitely a very fresh and new take on the world of Trek. Not only was it our first chance to see life on a Space Station, but doing it on a Cardassian Space Station rather than a Federation Starbase. Then of course there was a Maquis storyline which I always liked, the Wormhole, the Dominion, the Bajorins, the Cardassians, the Ferengi, the character relationships. The huge Starship battles, the politics, I could go on all day about DS9.

Voyager again was new and fresh, this was the first and only series to take place on a federation starship, that isn't the Enterprise. That isn't the flagship of the Federation, but to get to see life on a different type of ship.

And I don't see how Voyager can be viewed as stale, because it takes place in the Delta Quadrent and we got to see tons of new races never before seen, and they got to do alot of awesome exclusive storyline's that the other series could never touch.

And I know some people will say the Borg were used too much, but having the Borg in Voyager made sense, and I really liked how it was done.

Enterprise was also a new and fresh idea. Getting to see humans getting out for the first time, and seeing the early years of Starfleet, that's pre-federation, and seeing how they react to having no prime directive, no holodecks, no holograms, barely a warp drive, barely a phaser, and not only that but it really gave us much more insight into Vulcan and Andorian culture, something we never got from the other series. As well as the Klingon Forehead stuff.

But I would also like to hear your insights, what about those 3 series do you find stale or being a copy of a copy?

Vger23

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 6799

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 8:02 pm

Quote: Sora @ Nov. 26 2010, 7:34 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ Nov. 26 2010, 4:31 pm

>Just because TNG and TOS were more "episodic" doesn't mean that they were lower qualityu or less structured, as you've indicated. TNG was much fresher than the other spin-offs. DS9 through ENT were all copies-of-a-copy. It is what it is. It's the law of diminishing returns. Each successive series seemed more and more stale.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. I found DS9, through Enterprise to be fresh and exciting and to have new ideas. And yes there's similarities in all the series, but there's supposed to be isn't there? Seeing as how they're all centered in the same universe. DS9 was definitely a very fresh and new take on the world of Trek. Not only was it our first chance to see life on a Space Station, but doing it on a Cardassian Space Station rather than a Federation Starbase. Then of course there was a Maquis storyline which I always liked, the Wormhole, the Dominion, the Bajorins, the Cardassians, the Ferengi, the character relationships. The huge Starship battles, the politics, I could go on all day about DS9. Voyager again was new and fresh, this was the first and only series to take place on a federation starship, that isn't the Enterprise. That isn't the flagship of the Federation, but to get to see life on a different type of ship. And I don't see how Voyager can be viewed as stale, because it takes place in the Delta Quadrent and we got to see tons of new races never before seen, and they got to do alot of awesome exclusive storyline's that the other series could never touch. And I know some people will say the Borg were used too much, but having the Borg in Voyager made sense, and I really liked how it was done. Enterprise was also a new and fresh idea. Getting to see humans getting out for the first time, and seeing the early years of Starfleet, that's pre-federation, and seeing how they react to having no prime directive, no holodecks, no holograms, barely a warp drive, barely a phaser, and not only that but it really gave us much more insight into Vulcan and Andorian culture, something we never got from the other series. As well as the Klingon Forehead stuff. But I would also like to hear your insights, what about those 3 series do you find stale or being a copy of a copy?


You have to understand the context of what I'm saying. I'm not saying that I necessarily feel that they are "bad" or "copies." I'm saying that they were generally percieved that way, so they were less popular, which was your question was it not? I mean, each series was about a starship exploring the galaxy, responding to distress calls, etc.


Voyager was just like TNG except with the Delta Quadrant stuff. Enterprise was just like Voyager, except with a prequel backdrop. But, the ESSENSE of both those series was the same as TNG. The only series that was TRULY fresh was DS9. I don't think there's any argument. The "different" stuff in Voyager and Enterprise was just window dressing and backdrop. It really didn't make much of a difference. Same week-to-week format, same contrived "diverse crew."  "Meeting new races" and all that stuff that you mentioned is fluff to most people (and became fluff to me, quite honestly).


I AM KEE-ROCK!!

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 8:37 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ Nov. 26 2010, 8:02 pm

Quote: Sora @ Nov. 26 2010, 7:34 pm

Quote: Vger23 @ Nov. 26 2010, 4:31 pm

>Just because TNG and TOS were more "episodic" doesn't mean that they were lower qualityu or less structured, as you've indicated. TNG was much fresher than the other spin-offs. DS9 through ENT were all copies-of-a-copy. It is what it is. It's the law of diminishing returns. Each successive series seemed more and more stale.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. I found DS9, through Enterprise to be fresh and exciting and to have new ideas. And yes there's similarities in all the series, but there's supposed to be isn't there? Seeing as how they're all centered in the same universe. DS9 was definitely a very fresh and new take on the world of Trek. Not only was it our first chance to see life on a Space Station, but doing it on a Cardassian Space Station rather than a Federation Starbase. Then of course there was a Maquis storyline which I always liked, the Wormhole, the Dominion, the Bajorins, the Cardassians, the Ferengi, the character relationships. The huge Starship battles, the politics, I could go on all day about DS9. Voyager again was new and fresh, this was the first and only series to take place on a federation starship, that isn't the Enterprise. That isn't the flagship of the Federation, but to get to see life on a different type of ship. And I don't see how Voyager can be viewed as stale, because it takes place in the Delta Quadrent and we got to see tons of new races never before seen, and they got to do alot of awesome exclusive storyline's that the other series could never touch. And I know some people will say the Borg were used too much, but having the Borg in Voyager made sense, and I really liked how it was done. Enterprise was also a new and fresh idea. Getting to see humans getting out for the first time, and seeing the early years of Starfleet, that's pre-federation, and seeing how they react to having no prime directive, no holodecks, no holograms, barely a warp drive, barely a phaser, and not only that but it really gave us much more insight into Vulcan and Andorian culture, something we never got from the other series. As well as the Klingon Forehead stuff. But I would also like to hear your insights, what about those 3 series do you find stale or being a copy of a copy?

You have to understand the context of what I'm saying. I'm not saying that I necessarily feel that they are "bad" or "copies." I'm saying that they were generally percieved that way, so they were less popular, which was your question was it not? I mean, each series was about a starship exploring the galaxy, responding to distress calls, etc.

Voyager was just like TNG except with the Delta Quadrant stuff. Enterprise was just like Voyager, except with a prequel backdrop. But, the ESSENSE of both those series was the same as TNG. The only series that was TRULY fresh was DS9. I don't think there's any argument. The "different" stuff in Voyager and Enterprise was just window dressing and backdrop. It really didn't make much of a difference. Same week-to-week format, same contrived "diverse crew."  "Meeting new races" and all that stuff that you mentioned is fluff to most people (and became fluff to me, quite honestly).



Well, even though I love them, I have to admit that you're right. TNG was like TOS, and then Voyager was like TNG, and Enterprise like Voyager and TNG. Which I guess makes TOS and DS9 the most unique series out of the lot of them.

Live Long and Prosper

miklamar

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2159

Report this Nov. 26 2010, 8:44 pm

I think it's because TNG was like a continuation of TOS, but with new personnel and new adventures. (Nothing succeeds like success.) Most viewers, too, can find someone in its crew with whom to identify or in whose activities one enjoys becoming involved. In TOS, only the top 4 or 5 officers were given much depth, whereas the TNG episodes seemed to cover the activities of other crew members, such as junior officers and the O'Brien family. Plus, as I am beginning to understand, it seems to be more interesting to travel to different places than to be stationed to a starbase (as in DS9). Many younger viewers first experienced Voyager, which was much in the TOS and TNG vein, so there could be some overlap of audiences. Also, the age-groups of the audience may have helped to make TNG "more popular," being greater in numbers. But, personally, I think the writing for TNG was so much better. All these factors, combined, helped to make it the most popular of the various Star Trek series.


Var Miklama--Zakdorn, engineer. "A sound mind in a FULL body!" "Time, like latinum, is a limited quantity in the galaxy."

Sora

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2606

Report this Nov. 27 2010, 10:07 am

Fair enough. Maybe it's because I got into Star Trek at such a young age, and I think DS9-Enterprise are more exciting for younger people, maybe that's why I prefer them more now.

Live Long and Prosper

2takesfrakes

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 3683

Report this Nov. 27 2010, 12:51 pm

In short, I'm of the opinion that
the reason is Gene Roddenberry.
He had complete control that vital first
season - the kinds of characters, casting
those characters, putting his stamp on
everything else. Yes, Rick Berman took
over, but it was already established, then.

Roddenberry is not ALL of STAR TREK, but he
understood what its intentions were better
than anyone else and TNG reflects that. The
other shows were more interested in simply
keeping everybody on the Gravy Train. Gene
wanted that, yes, but it was his baby, too.

thereR4lights

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 2643

Report this Nov. 27 2010, 2:23 pm

TNG is concidered better because it set the bar (telivision wise, tos did movie wise)

it showed the media that it could be a jagurnaut, and in my opinion... it is the best, the episodic plots made it possible to realy build each character, shap him/her in to the crew we all know and love

Forum Permissions

You cannot post new topics in this forum

You cannot reply to topics in this forum

You cannot delete posts in this forum