Star Trek often gives the viewer excellence in story telling. Sometimes, though, it gives the viewer mediocrity. This is one of those times.
Star Trek has always suffered from very bizarre choices by the show's producers. Much of that is Gene Roddenberry's fault. Even after he died, his silly, arbitrary restrictions to storytelling remained.
This is an example of very poor television. Whenever TNG gives us episodes involving either of the female characters, they are often reduced to being love-sick twits. It happened with Troi (who was a criminally underused character), and here it happened with Beverly.
The other problem is the show starts with Beverly all of a sudden 'in love,' and her love interest is introduced out of the blue. No set up. No development. Just BAM, there he is. Lazy writing at its worst.
Then when the episode ends, even though Beverly and Riker both go through traumatic, life-altering experiences, the next episode starts with the 'magic reset button' that Star Trek is notorious for. If you're lucky, you might get one line of throwaway-dialogue that references what happens, but usually, it's completely ignored.
I have never understand why character continuity was rarely addressed in Star Trek. I have never understood why they couldn't do a better job at telling stories and having sub-plots across several episodes. It's quite possible to do that without having each episode run into each other, and it's quite possible to do that yet still keep each episode contained in its own story. It's also quite possible to let characters develop, change, and grow over the course of a series. Yet the producers of Star Trek always refused. Data was allowed to have an ongoing character arc. I don't know why he was the only character given that respect, but other characters should have as well. Especially Beverly, because Gates McFadden is an excellent performer, and she has always been well-loved by fans. So why treat the character and the actor who plays her with such disrespect?
Star Trek's show runners insisted on being lazy, and it's what prevented Star Trek from truly being great. They did improve with story arcs and subplots with DS9, but I guarantee had Roddenberry still been alive, that show would have been stuck in his little box, too.
As a result of this standard of poor, lazy storytelling and refusal to employ proper character development, Star Trek has always been a mixed bag for me. Sometimes, you get excellent television. Sometimes it's even some of the greatest television ever made. Sometimes, though, you get drivel. This episode falls into the drivel category.
Episodes like this are insulting to the viewer, and even more insulting to the actors. I know that I can't expect every episode to be a home run every time, but I wish they'd at least try. Reading about the behind-the-scenes of of the production reveals that the producers were constantly and purposefully hampering the storytelling. Why? Shouldn't the goal always be to achieve greatness? Mediocrity may be an easy mark to hit, but it's a waste of time for the viewer.
Let female characters be real people. Treat your audience like they're intelligent, because they are. Skip this episode. You'll be better off for it.
Star Trek has always suffered from very bizarre choices by the show's producers. Much of that is Gene Roddenberry's fault. Even after he died, his silly, arbitrary restrictions to storytelling remained.
This is an example of very poor television. Whenever TNG gives us episodes involving either of the female characters, they are often reduced to being love-sick twits. It happened with Troi (who was a criminally underused character), and here it happened with Beverly.
The other problem is the show starts with Beverly all of a sudden 'in love,' and her love interest is introduced out of the blue. No set up. No development. Just BAM, there he is. Lazy writing at its worst.
Then when the episode ends, even though Beverly and Riker both go through traumatic, life-altering experiences, the next episode starts with the 'magic reset button' that Star Trek is notorious for. If you're lucky, you might get one line of throwaway-dialogue that references what happens, but usually, it's completely ignored.
I have never understand why character continuity was rarely addressed in Star Trek. I have never understood why they couldn't do a better job at telling stories and having sub-plots across several episodes. It's quite possible to do that without having each episode run into each other, and it's quite possible to do that yet still keep each episode contained in its own story. It's also quite possible to let characters develop, change, and grow over the course of a series. Yet the producers of Star Trek always refused. Data was allowed to have an ongoing character arc. I don't know why he was the only character given that respect, but other characters should have as well. Especially Beverly, because Gates McFadden is an excellent performer, and she has always been well-loved by fans. So why treat the character and the actor who plays her with such disrespect?
Star Trek's show runners insisted on being lazy, and it's what prevented Star Trek from truly being great. They did improve with story arcs and subplots with DS9, but I guarantee had Roddenberry still been alive, that show would have been stuck in his little box, too.
As a result of this standard of poor, lazy storytelling and refusal to employ proper character development, Star Trek has always been a mixed bag for me. Sometimes, you get excellent television. Sometimes it's even some of the greatest television ever made. Sometimes, though, you get drivel. This episode falls into the drivel category.
Episodes like this are insulting to the viewer, and even more insulting to the actors. I know that I can't expect every episode to be a home run every time, but I wish they'd at least try. Reading about the behind-the-scenes of of the production reveals that the producers were constantly and purposefully hampering the storytelling. Why? Shouldn't the goal always be to achieve greatness? Mediocrity may be an easy mark to hit, but it's a waste of time for the viewer.
Let female characters be real people. Treat your audience like they're intelligent, because they are. Skip this episode. You'll be better off for it.