StarDestroyer.Net BBS

What happened between TOS & TNG that caused the crews to lose all sense?

I mean in TOS (im using the movies here) the security had ARMOUR, you couldn't fire a phaser without setting off an alarm. The crew actually seemed competent...

The engineers had protective suits AND breather masks within easy reach.

The crew was kept appraised of what was happening on the bridge via the PA system...

(okay this is a bit of shameless & useless rant, it seems that in the TOS & Movies the crew of the Ent. acted like a proper crew aboard a military vessel, or at least in a sensible manner)

Thats the point though.

In TNG they've become complacent, and deserve a solid kick in the backside to get them back to TOS-levels of competency.

Thats what happen when you turn a military ship into a family cruise ship.

Not to mention when Jellico took charge of the E-D everyone bitched and moaned. Whats worse is they attempted to portary Jellico as the BAD captain when infact he was the closest thing Trek has had to a real captain.

Alyeska wrote:Not to mention when Jellico took charge of the E-D everyone bitched and moaned. Whats worse is they attempted to portary Jellico as the BAD captain when infact he was the closest thing Trek has had to a real captain.

closest thing they have to a military captain

DocHorror wrote:What happened between TOS & TNG that caused the crews to lose all sense?

You really need to ask? Berman & Braga! Thats what happened.

No, Roddenberry happened. He and his pure image of Trek.

Oberleutnant wrote:No, Roddenberry happened. He and his pure image of Trek.

you can't mock his dream, might not be exciting or factual, but its a wonderful dream. and at the end of the day TOS didn't have any of the things your talking about it was the movies which is a little different from talking TOS.

My theory is that in the hundred odd years between TOS and TNG because of Technological advances they didnt feel the need to have Armour ect. most of the space they traveld in had already been explored as oposed to in TOS when they were going into teritories they hadnt before.

And anyway they arent Militery ships as such, they are exploration vessels.

Wrath wrote:

Oberleutnant wrote:No, Roddenberry happened. He and his pure image of Trek.

you can't mock his dream, might not be exciting or factual, but its a wonderful dream. and at the end of the day TOS didn't have any of the things your talking about it was the movies which is a little different from talking TOS.

Sorry, you misunderstood me. For the most part I agree with what Roddenberry wanted to achieve, but the criticisim presented here - badly equipped Starfleet personnel and Enteprise D aka. family cruise ship - are direct result of what Rodenberry did. He felt that Star Trek movies, especially those directed by Nicholas Meyer, had taken too militaristic way. This was the reason for the dramatic difference between TOS movie era and TNG.

For TNG Roddenberry wanted those pyjama uniforms and skirts for some male crewmembers (oh, the agony!). He wanted to make phasers look like lady shavers. He wanted to have families aboard starships...

While Rodenberry's vision of Utopia is interesting he forgot a couple things:

a) Utopia = NOWHERE

b) Having a society like he envisioned is a good thing possibly, but it overlooks the fact that there are forces out there, known as BAD GUYS (tm) who DONT like us, and would like nothing better to destroy us and take what we have.

Without these horridly warlike military forces he despised, you get your ass kicked back to the stone age or beyond
That might not be politically correct. But thats the way it is -- sitting and humming real loud wont save your ass from planetary bombardment.

Jellico was EXACTLY what the captain of a capital warship should be; Riker on the other hand in that ep, should have been court-martialed for insubordination and dereliction of duty, plus anything else they could think of.

TOS movie era was truly Star Trek's finest hour.

Hades wrote:
And anyway they arent Militery ships as such, they are exploration vessels.

Then why can it defeat military ships from Romulans and Klingons, and was mistaken for a battleship?

Oberleutnant wrote: Sorry, you misunderstood me. For the most part I agree with what Roddenberry wanted to achieve, but the criticisim presented here - badly equipped Starfleet personnel and Enteprise D aka. family cruise ship - are direct result of what Rodenberry did. He felt that Star Trek movies, especially those directed by Nicholas Meyer, had taken too militaristic way. This was the reason for the dramatic difference between TOS movie era and TNG.

For TNG Roddenberry wanted those pyjama uniforms and skirts for some male crewmembers (oh, the agony!). He wanted to make phasers look like lady shavers. He wanted to have families aboard starships...

I was in a big debate on spacebattles over the best captain in star fleet argueing againist most peoples chose of Jellico, I believe Alyeska might have taken part in that debate can't remeber for sure.

in anycase my arguement was simply Jellico is the idea military captain but not star fleet captain, simple because of Roddenberry vision of star trek, it doesn't fit it while you can argue and disagree with some of the aspects of the universe he created, we all watch and love it alike for different reasons.

the people who view Jellico as the best star fleet captain and complain about the body amour and stuff, in my opinion are forgetting what made star trek great, which the TOS based movies are easy the best ST movies out there TNG is very much the best of the TV shows in that universe and give ST is a TV show thats what you have to base it on.

ST isn't a military show it lost a lot I felt in DS9 and the dominion war because with that war I just felt it became losts its idenity and because just another sci fi show.

Burak Gazan wrote:While Rodenberry's vision of Utopia is interesting he forgot a couple things:

a) Utopia = NOWHERE

b) Having a society like he envisioned is a good thing possibly, but it overlooks the fact that there are forces out there, known as BAD GUYS (tm) who DONT like us, and would like nothing better to destroy us and take what we have.

Without these horridly warlike military forces he despised, you get your ass kicked back to the stone age or beyond
That might not be politically correct. But thats the way it is -- sitting and humming real loud wont save your ass from planetary bombardment.

Jellico was EXACTLY what the captain of a capital warship should be; Riker on the other hand in that ep, should have been court-martialed for insubordination and dereliction of duty, plus anything else they could think of.

thats exactly what I think is wrong with a lot of ST fans.

you don't like B&B for distroying Roddenberry show yet you want a more military feel to the show distorting the show even more then B&B have managed.

Wrath wrote:

Oberleutnant wrote: Sorry, you misunderstood me. For the most part I agree with what Roddenberry wanted to achieve, but the criticisim presented here - badly equipped Starfleet personnel and Enteprise D aka. family cruise ship - are direct result of what Rodenberry did. He felt that Star Trek movies, especially those directed by Nicholas Meyer, had taken too militaristic way. This was the reason for the dramatic difference between TOS movie era and TNG.

For TNG Roddenberry wanted those pyjama uniforms and skirts for some male crewmembers (oh, the agony!). He wanted to make phasers look like lady shavers. He wanted to have families aboard starships...

I was in a big debate on spacebattles over the best captain in star fleet argueing againist most peoples chose of Jellico, I believe Alyeska might have taken part in that debate can't remeber for sure.

in anycase my arguement was simply Jellico is the idea military captain but not star fleet captain, simple because of Roddenberry vision of star trek, it doesn't fit it while you can argue and disagree with some of the aspects of the universe he created, we all watch and love it alike for different reasons.

the people who view Jellico as the best star fleet captain and complain about the body amour and stuff, in my opinion are forgetting what made star trek great, which the TOS based movies are easy the best ST movies out there TNG is very much the best of the TV shows in that universe and give ST is a TV show thats what you have to base it on.

ST isn't a military show it lost a lot I felt in DS9 and the dominion war because with that war I just felt it became losts its idenity and because just another sci fi show.

Oh come now, the best ST is military based. Best movies? II and VI, one is a military endeavor against one of the best foes in science fiction history the other is thwarting a military plot that is both beleivable and well done. Best TNG shows? BoBW, Yesterday's Enterprise? Am I missing something?

What made Star Trek great was how much we saw of ourselves in it, the reason Star Trek has gone to hell in a handbasket is because there is nothing left to relate with. It is all Aliens of the Week with gratiutious use of the Big Red Reset Button.

ST isn't a military show it lost a lot I felt in DS9 and the dominion war because with that war I just felt it became losts its idenity and because just another sci fi show.

But you see, Starfleet IS a military force at times. If it wasn't supposed to be, it should be an armed exploratory arm of the Federation, rather than providing both military warships AND explorers it is in fact. ST IS a pesudo military show for that simple fact. IMHO DS9's war was the best of Trek, for it showed that one sometimes has to defend ones beliefs and government from those who would seek to destroy it and are powerful enough to launch a war to do so. To believe otherwise, that in an entire 2 quadrants, no one wants to go to war with the Federation, merely try devious plots that stop short of open warfare instead, is unbelievable to me.

It's fine to take the morral high ground and be primarily peaceful, but when you have enemies as large/powerful or larger/more powerful than you own government, one NEEDS a force to ensure most of your citizens are allowed to MAINTAIN their morral high ground and be primarily peaceful.

Oh come now, the best ST is military based. Best movies? II and VI, one is a military endeavor against one of the best foes in science fiction history the other is thwarting a military plot that is both beleivable and well done. Best TNG shows? BoBW, Yesterday's Enterprise? Am I missing something?

Yup. The best/most popular Trek has been the ones with a credible military threat and military actions taken by Starfleet. TNG might have been the most popular Trek TV show, and it might have been primarily peaceful (hell, Picard even said at one pont that Starfleet most emphatically was NOT a military force, even though it takes on all the responsibilities of one ), but the most popular episodes aren't the ones lacking in military conflict. Quite the opposite infact.

You know it.

Best TNG episode: Yesterday's Enterprise. We get to see the E-D with balls.

Ignorant twit wrote: Oh come now, the best ST is military based. Best movies? II and VI, one is a military endeavor against one of the best foes in science fiction history the other is thwarting a military plot that is both beleivable and well done. Best TNG shows? BoBW, Yesterday's Enterprise? Am I missing something?

What made Star Trek great was how much we saw of ourselves in it, the reason Star Trek has gone to hell in a handbasket is because there is nothing left to relate with. It is all Aliens of the Week with gratiutious use of the Big Red Reset Button.

ask yourself this would TNG have seen such a good show if had the military feel of DS9? where just about every ep in the last 2 seasons involved mititary action?

HappyTarget wrote:
But you see, Starfleet IS a military force at times. If it wasn't supposed to be, it should be an armed exploratory arm of the Federation, rather than providing both military warships AND explorers it is in fact. ST IS a pesudo military show for that simple fact. IMHO DS9's war was the best of Trek, for it showed that one sometimes has to defend ones beliefs and government from those who would seek to destroy it and are powerful enough to launch a war to do so. To believe otherwise, that in an entire 2 quadrants, no one wants to go to war with the Federation, merely try devious plots that stop short of open warfare instead, is unbelievable to me.

It's fine to take the morral high ground and be primarily peaceful, but when you have enemies as large/powerful or larger/more powerful than you own government, one NEEDS a force to ensure most of your citizens are allowed to MAINTAIN their morral high ground and be primarily peaceful.

every show needs an enemy , TOS had the klingons, TNG had the borg, DS9 had the dominion, Voyager had the borg again.

but in the end Roddenberrys dream for Star trek was that in the future you wouldn't need to fight wars over stuiped things, ask yourself why did he have the major alpha quad powers in TNG all in some what a peaceful stace , and introduce the borg as a major enemy? an enemy they can't use diplomatics with to avoid wars.

Yup. The best/most popular Trek has been the ones with a credible military threat and military actions taken by Starfleet. TNG might have been the most popular Trek TV show, and it might have been primarily peaceful (hell, Picard even said at one pont that Starfleet most emphatically was NOT a military force, even though it takes on all the responsibilities of one ), but the most popular episodes aren't the ones lacking in military conflict. Quite the opposite infact.

thats because peace doesn't make good tv.