ONGEG: Best of Both Worlds

[Sonnenburg]

Asses are laminated as the Borg return to take over the Federation, which is almost enough to get Riker to stop thinking about his problems.

Part 1
Part 2

[Ghost Rider]

I enjoyed your points on the Borg, but moreso Shelby. Especially given some of the points that were not covered usually. That and pointing out the music...my god, I did forget that, not only when the Borg appear, but the rise in music for part one was particularly awesome. Ah well, it was nice to see some change in TNG .

And the analysis of the end, is rather interesting...almost something I want to poke around on since that would be interesting to view TNG, DS9, Voy, and Ent to see how much they used it. But the thought is one that can be overdone. Having a cliffhanger means the threat has to be one the viewer percieves powerful enough. If not, such as Space Nazis, it puts the viewer in a position of disregarding the rest because the forced tension is poor to start.

Again, enjoyable to watch your review.

[Patrick Degan]

Part one of this story encapsulated everything that TNG could have been: good character drama, a tense and involving plot, and one hell of a cliffhanger. Then part two came along and pissed it all away.

[Stofsk]

Part two wasn't bad, it was good even, but Picard returning to being the captain was the letdown. But it's one of those things where you have to have it, or say goodbye to one of your strongest actors.

[Anguirus]

Part two wasn't bad, it was good even, but Picard returning to being the captain was the letdown. But it's one of those things where you have to have it, or say goodbye to one of your strongest actors.

I wonder if the show could have been rejiggered to give Riker a ship of his own and just keep him involved in the action. They probably weren't prepared to change the show so much...it would have been really hard to shoehorn two ships into all future plots. But Chuck is right: keeping Riker around entailed finishing his dramatic arc and then forgetting it ever happened.

[Stofsk]

Yes - the brilliance of BOBW is that Picard is captured and turned into the villain, and Riker, who has been in a very comfortable position for the last three years, is now thrust into the front row. It was a real sink or swim moment.

BOBW part 2 is still solid - especially when Riker comes up with his plan to capture Locutus in the hopes that they can find an exploit in the Borg - which incidentally, is a [tech] solution that actually makes a great deal of sense and follows logically from what we've observed about the Borg thus far. The worst part is Riker is given a brevet promotion by Admiral Hanson at the start of the episode - then by the episode's end, the reset button was pushed. That was the biggest letdown. At that point, Riker's promotion should have been made permanent, and Data should have been given a promotion as well (since he fucking saved the day), but like I said, you have to kill off Picard and thus say goodbye to Patrick Stewart - who really is one of your best actors - or very blatantly hit reset.

It's sad because BOBW rocks. It really is the best of TNG. Everytime I watch it I always go 'Damn Riker, you actually make me like you'. Then he happily goes back to being second row to Picard who really should have been honourably discharged from service on compassionate grounds. Similarly, once he took the captain's chair Riker should have gone 'y'know, I really wouldn't mind a seat of my own now'.

[Straha]

I really liked the review except for one major major flaw.

At about 3:20 in the part 2 video you say that the Era of Star Trek VI until "now" was the post-communist winds of change era and start talking about the massive mindset shift that BoBW brought to the Star Trek franchise and how it was, essentially, an irrevocable break from the past and a step forward into a brand new Star Trek.

Problem is that Best of Both Worlds came out in 1990, and shooting of Star Trek VI didn't begin until 1991. So, yeah...

[DaveJB]

I got the impression that Chuck was talking about that the era within the Trek universe (i.e. 2293-2366) when he made that remark, not the real world production era of Trek.

[Captain Seafort]

At that point, Riker's promotion should have been made permanent, and Data should have been given a promotion as well (since he fucking saved the day), but like I said, you have to kill off Picard and thus say goodbye to Patrick Stewart - who really is one of your best actors - or very blatantly hit reset.

Not necessarily - while I agree that Riker should have stayed a Captain after the episode, that doesn't necessarily require dropping Picard. They could have dropped Riker by leaving the Melbourne intact and giving him command (or another ship if they wanted to keep the impact of destroying the ship he could well have command at Wolf). Either Data or Shelby could have replaced him depending on whether Elizabeth Dennehy was willing to sign up long-term.

The alternative would have been to drop Picard temporarily while he recovered mentally and physically. While the metal after-effects of his assimilation were looked at in Family and later, the physical speed of his recovery struck me as somewhat odd and unrealistic. After about half a season, they could have brought him back as either a civilian diplomatic advisor or and Admiral with the Enterprise as his flagship (with opportunities for conflict between Picard in overall command of the mission-of-the-week and Riker commanding the ship).

[Straha]

I got the impression that Chuck was talking about that the era within the Trek universe (i.e. 2293-2366) when he made that remark, not the real world production era of Trek.

Listen to the production again. If that's true then the comparison between the mindset of Star Trek and Bill Clinton, the Labour Party and Whoopie Goldberg makes no sense. Same with saying America was no longer the same place and that having a therapist on the bridge was perfectly logical. Frankly, I think he's a much better writer than that and that he wouldn't be spending as much time as he did drawing out real world connections to the production of the TV show unless he was making a point about how the real world effected the TV show's mindset.

To put it another way: I'd rather think that Mr. Sonnenburg got the Trek production timeline screwed up in his head and thought that BoBW came after ST VI (just like I did before I went to double check something when I was drafting a longer response to this review), than think that he's engaging in some rather sub-par and superfluous writing.

[Azron_Stoma]

he wouldn't be spending as much time as he did drawing out real world connections to the production of the TV show unless he was making a point about how the real world effected the TV show's mindset.

How could the real world have affected the TV Show's mindset?

Best of Both Worlds = 1990

September 11th 2001 = do the math

He was drawing real world comparisons to show how one event could change the entire mindset of a civilization, between Wolf 359 and the real world 9/11.

Comparing 2293-2367 to the Clinton Era, and everything after that to Bush I guess, though I feel that would be unfair since 2367 onwards sparked an Improved Federation (though those improvements took about 6 years to actually come into being).

The point is that it caused a dramatic shift.

[Uraniun235]

I was pleased that this review had a lot less "narrate the plot" going on than the previous review I saw, Manhunt. I think what synopsis was there was still too wordy. I also still think the humor is weak and nitpicky at best, and sometimes compromises the quality of the commentary offered; for example, taking fifteen seconds to set up the "no fat chicks" line, rather than actually bluntly confront the issue that Star Trek was still very willing to objectify the feminine physique despite all pretenses of being an 'enlightened' production portraying an 'enlightened' culture.


The conclusion that Enterprise had an incredibly retarded cliffhanger because BOBW was successful seems like a really bad stretch to me - like one of those terrible nerd theories designed to tie every other god-being in TOS to the Q Continuum so that they can pretend there's more continuity in the Star Trek franchise than there really is. I don't think Enterprise needed any help in sucking, and I rather suspect that we would have seen something equally bad with or without BOBW.

And the analysis of the end, is rather interesting...almost something I want to poke around on since that would be interesting to view TNG, DS9, Voy, and Ent to see how much they used it.

The cliffhanger wasn't even that egregiously abused. DS9 didn't have cliffhangers in the same way that TNG did - they didn't really end series in the middle of a story, more like at the end of an act, setting the stage for the next season. Even one of the biggest ones, at the end of season 5 where they showed the Defiant joining up with a big Federation fleet, was an accident; the writers had no idea the VFX guys were going to trump it up so much, which actually spurred them to open the next season with "yeah those guys actually have been getting punked for the last few months". Hell, Voyager didn't have cliffhangers every season - they only had as many as TNG did.

If you want to blame BOBW for something I would blame it for First Contact, which put the perverse idea in Paramount's minds that Star Trek movies all needed to be action flicks first and foremost.


The bit about LeVar Burton was a nice bit of trivia; I didn't know that. The reference to Admiral Hansen being played by the same guy who did God in Star Trek 5 was rather obtuse.


Also the idea that this "opinionated" review has to take a moment to make the disclaimer that "whether America and other Western nations either finally woke up, or imposed Big Brother-esque invasions of privacy, is up to each individual's interpretation" seems absurd to me. What does this remark accomplish? It comes across as filler, frankly. You know you don't have to fill out the whole eleven minutes, right?

[Stofsk]

I was pleased that this review had a lot less "narrate the plot" going on than the previous review I saw, Manhunt. I think what synopsis was there was still too wordy. I also still think the humor is weak and nitpicky at best, and sometimes compromises the quality of the commentary offered; for example, taking fifteen seconds to set up the "no fat chicks" line, rather than actually bluntly confront the issue that Star Trek was still very willing to objectify the feminine physique despite all pretenses of being an 'enlightened' production portraying an 'enlightened' culture.

I think this review was one of Chuck's strongest, but I agree that he focuses too much on episode synopsis when what makes a review are a discussion and exploration of the themes, characterisations, performances, and other things like visual and sound effects, music, and other direction choices that affect the atmosphere. At times the humour is lame, but one joke I liked was '...and if you think my metaphor is wrong you'd be right... it's actually a simile.'

The conclusion that Enterprise had an incredibly retarded cliffhanger because BOBW was successful seems like a really bad stretch to me - like one of those terrible nerd theories designed to tie every other god-being in TOS to the Q Continuum so that they can pretend there's more continuity in the Star Trek franchise than there really is. I don't think Enterprise needed any help in sucking, and I rather suspect that we would have seen something equally bad with or without BOBW.

I agree. A better comparison to make would have been another TNG cliffhanger, since it's contextually within the same show and creative direction. Sure, B&B were involved in both TNG and ENT, but that's the only real common link between them.

I would have shown how successful BOBW was with creating the cliffhanger type story, with say 'Time's Arrow part 1' which was such a boring episode with a lame premise I fell asleep when I first watched it - when I was more of a TNG fan. The only other cliffhangers you could look at also didn't have the level of 'ZOMG awesome!' like 'Redemption part 1' and 'Descent part 1', although those were still solid episodes.

The cliffhanger wasn't even that egregiously abused. DS9 didn't have cliffhangers in the same way that TNG did - they didn't really end series in the middle of a story, more like at the end of an act, setting the stage for the next season. Even one of the biggest ones, at the end of season 5 where they showed the Defiant joining up with a big Federation fleet, was an accident; the writers had no idea the VFX guys were going to trump it up so much, which actually spurred them to open the next season with "yeah those guys actually have been getting punked for the last few months". Hell, Voyager didn't have cliffhangers every season - they only had as many as TNG did.

I didn't know that about 'A Call to Arms'. What was the story there?

If you want to blame BOBW for something I would blame it for First Contact, which put the perverse idea in Paramount's minds that Star Trek movies all needed to be action flicks first and foremost.

Well... I would blame First Contact for First Contact. BOBW had some incredible lines in it, like Picard's ruminations about whether this was the end of their civilisation, 'turn the page.' Quiet, reserved, insightful - that's the Picard we know, when in FC he picks up a phaser rifle and never puts it down.

The bit about LeVar Burton was a nice bit of trivia; I didn't know that. The reference to Admiral Hansen being played by the same guy who did God in Star Trek 5 was rather obtuse.

Agreed, both counts.

Also the idea that this "opinionated" review has to take a moment to make the disclaimer that "whether America and other Western nations either finally woke up, or imposed Big Brother-esque invasions of privacy, is up to each individual's interpretation" seems absurd to me. What does this remark accomplish? It comes across as filler, frankly. You know you don't have to fill out the whole eleven minutes, right?

On the other hand, I really liked how Chuck made the comparison with Wolf 359 being the Federation's 9/11. The fact that it was a historical moment which had far-reaching long-term consequences - both good and bad - was a worthy point to make.

[Uraniun235]

That's perhaps the most insightful thing with regard to the rest of the continuity, and it's even setup by the previous Borg episode - the idea that Q had, one way or the other, tried to kick the Federation out of its complacency. And it didn't really take until 359. We also see consequences of 359 throughout the rest of TNG and into DS9.

I didn't know that about 'A Call to Arms'. What was the story there?

I don't remember the exact phrasing, but if I remember right what happened was basically that the writers had written something to the effect of "we see the Defiant joining up with some other Starfleet ships". Then as-produced we saw the Defiant joining up with the biggest group of Starfleet ships seen to date in Star Trek, accompanied by "hell yeah we're gonna fuck some shit up" music - which creates the unfortunate impression that "oh yeah we're gonna go back and take back DS9 right now". So they wrote the opening scene of the next season to show that the fleet had been mauled up.

[Crazedwraith]

Were those 'dramatic' BoBW moments with music the original 'good' composer because to me they pretty much sounded hideously overblown. Like Doctor Who music. Yes, I get it, Riker's doing something all heroic and self-sacrificing and shocking. It does not require that many 'baaaaaah!' noises. Distracts me from what's happening.

[Anguirus]

^ Trust me, when you are actually watching the episode, and in the proper context (we last saw this enemy two years ago and they only didn't kill everybody because they wanted to fuck around with them a little first), that music works. Rick Berman's music is all EXACTLY THE SAME. I'm re-watching DS9 right now and it's infuriating.

It's the most tense moment in all of TNG, and also the most "overblown" music in all of TNG. That music + that moment = win.

[Gramzamber]

^ Trust me, when you are actually watching the episode, and in the proper context (we last saw this enemy two years ago and they only didn't kill everybody because they wanted to fuck around with them a little first), that music works. Rick Berman's music is all EXACTLY THE SAME. I'm re-watching DS9 right now and it's infuriating.

It's the most tense moment in all of TNG, and also the most "overblown" music in all of TNG. That music + that moment = win.

I agree. It's hard to sense with just a clip, but watching the full episode for the first time all those years back, with that music, it just made me feel bad shit was going down.
The Borg are big, creepy, alien and unstoppable and they're coming. The music just cemented that.

[Uraniun235]

Were those 'dramatic' BoBW moments with music the original 'good' composer because to me they pretty much sounded hideously overblown. Like Doctor Who music. Yes, I get it, Riker's doing something all heroic and self-sacrificing and shocking. It does not require that many 'baaaaaah!' noises. Distracts me from what's happening.

BOBW holds no candle whatsoever to the Doctor Who music. Seriously, play a couple of tracks from the DW soundtrack, and then a couple from BOBW; BOBW will be completely gutless by comparison. (Although the DW music is still way overblown.)

The most outrageous moment is the finale of Part 1, right after Riker says 'fire'. And that's legitimate, because that's the biggest moment in all of TNG: they could have killed Captain Picard right there.


I'm curious though: can you give examples of what you think was appropriate music in other episodes or series? Because most of the big space opera that I can think of is rife with big, bombastic music, and I tend to think it's better for it.

[Big Orange]

If you want to blame BOBW for something I would blame it for First Contact, which put the perverse idea in Paramount's minds that Star Trek movies all needed to be action flicks first and foremost.

Well... I would blame First Contact for First Contact. BOBW had some incredible lines in it, like Picard's ruminations about whether this was the end of their civilisation, 'turn the page.' Quiet, reserved, insightful - that's the Picard we know, when in FC he picks up a phaser rifle and never puts it down.

First Contact is a flawed movie and comparatively light hearted (or cheesier) in relation to "Best of Borth Worlds", but I still feel it was the best TNG movie (not very hard to do, but still...) and I enjoyed it as much as The Search For Spock, Abrams' Star Trek, and The Voyage Home (which First Contact is the most like). The seemingly sedate, though steely Captain Picard becoming almost like John McClane was a bad thing to repeat in the next two considerably less successful movies, I wouldn't say it was completely out of character, even in relation to "I Borg", since in that episode he was faced with a lone Borg drone who was seriously injured, and was easier to relate to and sympathise with (a good person in a war wouldn't go out of his way to kill wounded enemies). In First Contact the Borg came back in full force, shot down a lot of Starfleet, threatened Earth, boarded Picard's ship, and were killing/assimilating his crew, so that'd tear open old wounds in Picard and compel him to fight back violently.

TNG got very popular and acclaimed with "Yesterday's Enterprise" and "Best of Both Worlds", setting a high watermark, however I personally prefered "All Good Things", "The Chain of Command", and "Unification" as two parters (but that's mainly down to me watching them first time at a certain age that I could properly take those episodes in; I could only vaguely remember "BOBW", the best scene that stuck in my head from all those years ago being Admiral Hanson's last communication message before the Borg rudely interrupted him).