@@TheSciFiSavage Oh absolutely. I have just been appreciating the little things a bit more. The start of her friendship with Worf for one. I think the biggest drawback to her character is only existing in season 2. I know things were starting to change after season 1, but many of the characters didn't really come into their full selves until season 3 and beyond. I'd love to see an alternate world where she (and Tasha) got to grow and become fleshed out in those later years.
@@windgraceproject you're right about that! The entire show seemed to hit its stride in season 3. Both of those characters needed another season or 2 to be fully flushed out - but we already knew and loved Beverly. It would have been interesting to have 2 doctors on board we could swap between but probably would have been a nightmare to manage the logistics.
@TheSciFiSavage if the experience hadn't been so bad it might have been interesting to have her on another show, or even just guest on occasion. In the episode where Worf breaks his back it's almost like they just invented a new Pulaski because they couldn't bring her back. Lol
Come on, what about Lwaxana Troi? If she's not a memorable character, nobody is. And in the later episodes, they filled out a little of her backstory, so she wasn't just a ditzy caricature.
OMG yes! Vash was such a fun and interesting character! The only reason she's not on this list is because I focused on people who worked on the ship. Otherwise the list could get much, much longer lol.
Forgot about Bevs relationship with John Doe. She does have a type, secretly an energy being. 😅 I know we all like to slam Sub Rosa. But really in a way, it's a genre Trek should do more of. Don't we all secretly love paranormal romance? ❤
I guess she does have a type 😆. My main problem with Sub Rosa is that she's hooking up with the same man/ghost/alien that her grandmother hooked up with. AND all the women of her family hooked up with fire centuries. Hard pass on that for me 🤣
Hey, that's good breakdowns of women characters. OK... maybe not deep enough on Pullasky, otherwise - great! With Pullasky, you should realize it's about the dinamics of original series... TOS had this Spock/Bones dinamics which they were trying to recreate with Data/Pullasky, but it was neither needed, nor kept up, so Pullasky is off :) And about Beverly... yeah, creator's point of view (Rodenberry): officers should not engage in romantic relationships.
That's a fair point for Pulaski! I figured they were trying to recreate TOS dynamics, but it didn't make sense in TNG, at least not in season 2 when characters are already established. Guess it was worth a try though? As for Beverly and Picard, after 7 sessions of disappointment, I had zero emotional reaction to how their story ended in season 3 of Picard. I would still want to see them hook up even if for only 1 episode. Maybe that's just me lol
@@TheSciFiSavage Well, that doesn't make sense in hindsight... at the time it was the end of season 1 and it wasn't a big hit, so the producers were thinking how to make it better, more to people's liking... what should we change from season 1 to season 2 so the show would become more liked... and Spock/Bones dinamics seemd to be what they decided upon - but that was not what the show needed (as it was proven later).
I'll never want to replace Beverly, but I've been steadily letting Pulaski grow on me these past few years.
I think Pulaski is intelligent and resourceful, which is a plus. But she's also condescending, which is a huge minus for me...🤔
@@TheSciFiSavage Oh absolutely. I have just been appreciating the little things a bit more. The start of her friendship with Worf for one. I think the biggest drawback to her character is only existing in season 2. I know things were starting to change after season 1, but many of the characters didn't really come into their full selves until season 3 and beyond. I'd love to see an alternate world where she (and Tasha) got to grow and become fleshed out in those later years.
@@windgraceproject you're right about that! The entire show seemed to hit its stride in season 3. Both of those characters needed another season or 2 to be fully flushed out - but we already knew and loved Beverly. It would have been interesting to have 2 doctors on board we could swap between but probably would have been a nightmare to manage the logistics.
@TheSciFiSavage if the experience hadn't been so bad it might have been interesting to have her on another show, or even just guest on occasion. In the episode where Worf breaks his back it's almost like they just invented a new Pulaski because they couldn't bring her back. Lol
@@windgraceproject ooo, that's an interesting idea...🤔
Thank you, the video was a lot of fun!
I'm so glad you enjoyed it!
"A Starfleet admiral could NEVER do something wrong!" ..says the captain who's already dealt with Jameson, Satie, and to a lesser extent, Haftel.
Exactly. These admirals are just people like everyone else...🤔
Your list shows how TNG presented substantial female characters. I love Guinan, but Ro Laren is my favorite.
I love that Ro is your favorite! I'm not sure I've heard that one before. And I agree, these were all smart capable women. 💯💯💯
Come on, what about Lwaxana Troi? If she's not a memorable character, nobody is. And in the later episodes, they filled out a little of her backstory, so she wasn't just a ditzy caricature.
I completely agree! I decided to focus on women who actually worked on the ship. Otherwise, Lawaxana (and Vash) would have totally made the list!
I thought Vash was memorable too. She really knew how to get stuff done her own way
OMG yes! Vash was such a fun and interesting character! The only reason she's not on this list is because I focused on people who worked on the ship. Otherwise the list could get much, much longer lol.
Ooh, "Shades of Grey". No budget, writer's strike, being part of early TNG in general...it had a lot going against it.
That's fair. Such a bummer that it was the season finale 😕
Forgot about Bevs relationship with John Doe. She does have a type, secretly an energy being. 😅
I know we all like to slam Sub Rosa. But really in a way, it's a genre Trek should do more of. Don't we all secretly love paranormal romance? ❤
I guess she does have a type 😆. My main problem with Sub Rosa is that she's hooking up with the same man/ghost/alien that her grandmother hooked up with. AND all the women of her family hooked up with fire centuries. Hard pass on that for me 🤣
Hey, that's good breakdowns of women characters.
OK... maybe not deep enough on Pullasky, otherwise - great! With Pullasky, you should realize it's about the dinamics of original series... TOS had this Spock/Bones dinamics which they were trying to recreate with Data/Pullasky, but it was neither needed, nor kept up, so Pullasky is off :)
And about Beverly... yeah, creator's point of view (Rodenberry): officers should not engage in romantic relationships.
That's a fair point for Pulaski! I figured they were trying to recreate TOS dynamics, but it didn't make sense in TNG, at least not in season 2 when characters are already established. Guess it was worth a try though?
As for Beverly and Picard, after 7 sessions of disappointment, I had zero emotional reaction to how their story ended in season 3 of Picard.
I would still want to see them hook up even if for only 1 episode. Maybe that's just me lol
@@TheSciFiSavage Well, that doesn't make sense in hindsight... at the time it was the end of season 1 and it wasn't a big hit, so the producers were thinking how to make it better, more to people's liking... what should we change from season 1 to season 2 so the show would become more liked... and Spock/Bones dinamics seemd to be what they decided upon - but that was not what the show needed (as it was proven later).