Angel One Review at TV Squad

My review of Angel One, which is part of the Top Five Most Painful TNG Episodes Ever, is up at TV Squad.

If you missed this morning’s preview (and if you did, what the hell, man?) here’s another bit of Mojo for your Nixon:

When they get to the planet, we discover that the women are all
statuesque beauties with perfectly feathered hair, and the men are all
refugees from Planet Simper V. After a tense palaver with the planet’s
only two leaders with any opinions whatsoever, Mistresses Beata and
Ariel, the away team is sent to their room to think about what they did
while mommy and mommy talk. Like all kids who are sent to their rooms,
though, instead of contritely thinking about what they did, they plot
against the people who sent them there.

Troi says that pretty
much everyone in the room was freaked out about something. Maybe it has
something to do with the Odin crew. Tasha’s insightful analysis: "Why?
Good question." Data (and the audience) wonder what they’ll do if the
Mistresses deny the existence of any survivors. Hey, that’s a good
question, and probably something we’d all like to be prepared for,
right, Riker? Actually, no. Riker petulantly tells Data, "Let’s not
look for problems." Yeah, because looking for and solving problems just
isn’t the way we do things in Starfleet, dog.

Of all the reviews I’ve done so far, this was the hardest for me to write. I didn’t work on the episode for more than one day, so I don’t have that many behind the scenes memories. The final product is so unbelievably horrible, it was a challenge to do more than write, "This thing was stupid, this thing was also stupid, this thing should be retconned, this thing was lame," etc.

So I wrote the first draft, and I asked Andrew to give me some help with the rewrite. I figured that he would have his own take on it, and would be able to help me find jokes where I was missing them. He did, and so far, the jokes everyone is picking out as their favorites were all written by him. I believe in giving credit where credit is due, so direct your praise for Worf’s sinuses and Riker’s wait for command in Andrew’s direction. He also found a gag to go with the vase, which I wanted to put in, but just couldn’t find on my own. The snu-snu, though, was all me, baby. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is spongy and bruised.

The column was getting long, so I didn’t have space to include something that I think it historically important about this show. If I only had a blog where I could share the additional information, I’d say . . .

Angel One is mostly crap, but the original story  sounds like it was pretty cool. Larry Nemecek’s Star Trek The Next Generation Companion (which is a surreal experience for me to read, because it speaks to the fanboy and cast member in me simultaneously) says that "Heavy rewrites changed Patrick Barry’s original story — a direct, action-filled, allegory to apartheid using the sexes instead of the races to make his point." Larry gives more plot details in the book, which I won’t reprint here because I think that probably exceeds fair use. Director Michael Rhodes says that a big reason this story falls flat was Gene’s determination to strip any conflict out of this script, and that Gene decreed that there was "no place for conflict in Star Trek." I hate to be critical of Gene, but I clearly remember Rhodes and several members of the cast sitting on Stage 6 one morning, absolutely incredulous that anyone could think that interesting drama was possible without conflict.

You know how you’re a kid, and your parents are arguing about something, and you know they’re arguing but they tell you everything’s fine, we’re just talking, so go back to bed? That’s how I felt during this entire episode (even though I wasn’t working on it, I was there every day to go to school.) The actors hated it. I mean, they really, really hated it — almost as much as I hate Dick Cheney. I haven’t been able to confirm this with people
who allegedly participated, but I’ve heard from other Star Trek alumni
that some of the actors hated this script so much — it was even more
sexist and stupid in one of the drafts that it is in the final cut, if
you can believe that — they refused to work for a day or so until
various things were rewritten. Some people would say that’s a case of
actors being difficult, but I’d say it’s an example of how much we all
cared about the show, and how we all wanted it to be awesome and
successful.

Oh, and if you Digg it and Propel it, a talking goat will bring you a box of wine, for free! If that doesn’t wax your skis, I can assure you that Digging and Propelling will get you laid. And who doesn’t like that?

(Heh. "get you laid" sounds like 9th grade tough-guy talk during lunch. It also makes me think of Beavis and Butthead, for some reason.)

28 thoughts on “Angel One Review at TV Squad”

  1. I think it’s fascinating that you’ve chosen to mostly go for the painful and occasionally even embarrassing episodes from the library to cover. Not ironically, though, sometimes the pain and negativity brings its own special kind of insight into the show than simply cooing fondly over the gems.
    That said, boy it would be great to hear you talk about The First Duty or Final Mission, which must have afforded you some great opportunities to exercise your acting chops at the time, and prove to be episodes you’re genuinely proud of.

  2. So, who gets the credit for “Tilt-A-Riker” because that, dear sir, is the BEST thing I have heard all day and will be making me chuckle to myself for a long time.
    Left a comment at TV Squad. It ended up being a really nice review. Congrats to you and Andrew!
    Cheers!

  4. Wil and Andrew… you two are an awesome team and that shows. Wil, even though you had to review a suckish episode, your love for TNG really, really shines through. Especially in your epilogue here on the blog.

  5. Is “kill-u-lator” yours? Because that got the biggest giggle cascade from me.
    I like funny words.
    These episode reviews are a dream come true for me. I love them.
    PS, I had a secret crush on you when I was young enough to feel I needed to outwardly profess that boys were icky

  6. you know, Wil. What would be awesome, is if you did a Podcast commentary track for SNTNG, the way that Ronald Moore did for BSG. That would be right up there with watching The Wizard of Oz while listening to Dark Side of the Moon.

  9. TNG is like two different series in terms of just about every aspect of its production. The first two seasons are barely tolerable while the rest were largely enjoyable.
    I’m amazed the show was able to make it to the third season, given the kind of tripe fans had to swallow at the beginning.

  11. Also, to add to raphael’s comments, I would also like to read about your experiences during production of The Game. That was the episode where I realized Wesley Crusher wasn’t a lame-ass after all, and was in fact so cool he could score with Ashley Judd. It’s also where I realized the writers really missed an opportunity to create a character I could grow up with. (The series started when I was 13.)

  12. I’m not deliberately picking out bad episodes. I’m just going in chronological order, and . . . well, it’s the first season.
    I skipped Code of Honor (which will be rectified in my next review) because I wasn’t in it. I’ve since decided, in the interests of completion, to do Code of Honor, so I can fill it with 7UP references.

  13. AsI said in the preceding thread, that you for at long, long, loonnnngggg last letting me derive some proper enjoyment from this episode.
    I actually grok what you mean about The Worry Seat, though. When ST:The Experience came to London, and I had a chance to sit in The Big Chair I had to pause, and look at it, and all the other stuff. Before, of course, slamming big doors closed in my brain on “who else has sat in this seat? What have they done in this seat?”.
    Some things would just ruin the moment. I sat. My old, dear friend – to whom I’m acting as best man early next year – sat in Number One’s spot.
    This was it. I felt The Seat around me. I smelled the air. Gazed into the viewscreen. It was special. It was important. I had waited for and dreamed of this moment since I was 13.
    I reached into my pocket, withdrew my packet of Marlboro reds, pulled a cigarette out, held it carefully between my fingers and waved ahead.
    “Engage!”
    The shutter of the photographer’s camera was loud, despite him bursting out laughing.
    I’ve still got that photo somewhere 😀

  14. Awesome review as usual. I have been watching some of the early episodes, but I haven’t been able to bring myself to put that one on. Even when I was 14 and pretty much liked all the episodes, I couldn’t watch that one without cringing.
    Especially seeing that outfit Riker had to put on! Siegfried and Roy – perfect.

  15. No matter who came up with what joke, any Star Trek review that manages to fit in throw-backs to both Futurama _and_ Family Guy is boss in my book.
    This really was a shoddy episode, one that I tend to avoid when I’m on a TNG bender. If anything, it illustrates that even the coolest of stuff has its crap moments. But that’s life, and I can always substitute “The Game” for “Angel One” if I want.
    /return to bootytown

  16. As usual you managed too pull off a miracle, with a really dull episode you made a funny and engaging review, much more engaging than the actually episode was.
    Now I’ve finished with the ass kissing I have to turn into a geek… sorry
    You said ‘Important Trek trivia note: This is the first time we ever see the transporter used site to site, rather than to or from a transporter pad.’
    I believe that this happened in ‘Far Point’, we have Troi screaming about pain in the tunnels under the station and Riker above, they all communicate with each other and Riker asks to be beamed to her location. Isn’t that the first time site to site is used?
    Anyway you can put that down to me being anal and needing to correct everything, great review and if you want to send some flying Monkeys to kill me, or just tie me to a chair and force me watch this episode over and over again, I’ll understand.

  17. Is there a page that lists links to all of your ST:TNG reviews on TV Squad? If not which one is the first one. I want to read through them all.
    Thanks for the amazing words you give us.
    — Matt

  20. That’s some fine reviewing there, Lou. Er, I mean Wil.
    Very, very funny stuff. Actually makes me want to watch it…which is quite a feat.
    Also, allow me to emphatically second the suggestion that you do podcast commentary for these things. That would be beyond price. In fact, I would pay for it.

  22. Hello Wil,
    I have also enjoyed your reviews. I remember watching “Angel One” back in 1987 and thinking the plot was corny and dated back then. And I’m only about six months older than you are (which means I get to call you “kid”) so it’s not like I was as bitter and jaded as I am now.
    I don’t know. The whole role reversal, society run by women plot lost most of its currency after the 70’s when the women’s rights movement ceased to be all that newsworthy, and lost all of it when it was used in an episode of “Josie and the Pussycats In Outer Space.”
    I can’t help but wonder what Roddenberry meant by “no place for conflict in Star Trek.” Because obviously, there was always conflict in Star Trek. I’m assuming he means internal conflict, moral dilemmas and stuff like that. Hence why Ellison’s “City On the Edge of Forever” was changed, I would imagine. That’s the only possible explanation I can think of. If that’s the case, it is a rather dated, even by 1987’s standards, view of storytelling. Thank goodness the series managed to move away from that.
    If I may add on more general note, I was always a fan of the series. Not as die hard as some, but someone has to have sex with girls. Not that I ever did back then, but whatever. I may have noticed some of the writing shortcomings in the show, (after all, I noticed writing shortcomings in Return of the Jedi, for goodness sakes) but I was willing to overlook them as I came to know and love the characters. This may be why I didn’t get into the later two series. Or was it three? Three series. I just didn’t like the other characters as much. (And adding Worf to DS9 smacked of a cheap means to get me to start watching the show that I was too bitter and jaded to fall for)
    Also, I was never in the “Die Wesley, Die” camp. I don’t know if it was because I was close to your age or what, but I identified with the character, clever mix of deus ex machina and Mary Sue though he may be. I didn’t mind.
    Peace.

  23. Wil,
    Great review. Less funny, more commentary on the episode itself, which is interesting. I think you were fair, though; this one was clunky even when I was a teenager.
    Those of us keeping score at home knew that the reviews are roughly in production order; except for when people (myself included) whined at you to review “Encounter at Farpoint”.
    but I’ve heard from other Star Trek alumni that some of the actors hated this script so much — it was even more sexist and stupid in one of the drafts that it is in the final cut, if you can believe that — they refused to work for a day or so until various things were rewritten.
    That’s really extraordinary. IT shows the depth of feeling people had for the show, even in that early stage.
    Random item. I haven’t read “I am Not Spock” by Leanard Nimoy, his autobiography written in the 1970s, I think, but I have read the later one “I am Spock”. In the latter book, he talks about being offered the executive producer position for TNG. The last sentence of that pargraph explains that he turned it down, saying that the original Star Trek had been something very special and he didn’t think they could catch lightning in a bottle again.
    The next paragraph of Nimoy’s book is a single sentence (quoted here from memory): “You know, crow isn’t so bad. It tastes kind of like chicken.”
    Please keep up the reviews, Wil. Being able to understand the bad stuff only increases the appreciation of the good stuff.
    Cheers!

  26. and, honestly, can you blame anyone who wants to wipe that whole episode from their memory? Don’t be too quick to judge; we’re going to want to do the same thing with this one in about ten minutes.
    O.K. Wil – you owe me a drink at BARGE since you made me remember this episode.
    I owe you and Andrew one for the review – it was … excellent …

  27. “Back on the planet, Data comes up with a pretty cool way of finding the Odin’s survivors: isolate something unique to them that doesn’t occur on Angel One — like chest hair, or maybe just dudes who don’t spray themselves with perfume — and scan for that.”
    Sir, I am here to inform you that, as a result of the above statement, you owe me one (1) new keyboard.

  28. I haven’t yet read either of Nimoy’s books. However, on one of the specials filmed to drum up interest in the fourth and final episode of Battlestar Galactica among those too benighted to have become addicted yet, there was one interesting tidbit. Edward James Olmos had been asked to read for the part of the Captain in TNG, but felt that it had been too soon since Bladerunner, and turned it down.
    What a very different show it might have been, with Nimoy as executive producer, and Olmos as the captain…
    Proto, Wil understands tis episode perfectly. It’s a sexist mess. It sucks. By its existence, it soils the good name of Star Trek; its effect is somewhat mitigated by episodes like “Inner Light” and “The Game”, but only somewhat.
    Okay, maybe it’s not that bad, but Lord, it’s not good.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

Recent Posts