Jammer's Review
Star Trek: The Next Generation
"A Matter of Time"




Air date: 11/18/1991
Written by Rick Berman
Directed by Paul Lynch
Review by Jamahl Epsicokhan
A cheerful man named Professor Berlinghoff Rasmussen (Matt Frewer, of Max Headroom fame at the time) appears before the Enterprise in a small shuttlecraft and claims he is a historian from the 26th century ... and that he has traveled back to the 24th century to witness history — specifically today — as it unfolds. Meanwhile, the Enterprise rushes to help a planet in terrible danger from atmospheric dust caused from an asteroid impact. A nuclear winter may be imminent. They must figure out a way to save the planet and its population of millions from the environmental catastrophe.
"A Matter of Time" is a story that stares the notion of a time paradox in the face and hope it blinks. The crew wants to know why Rasmussen has picked this day, of all days, to learn about the Enterprise and the 24th century. Rasmussen cites what is essentially the Temporal Prime Directive in explaining why he cannot drop any hints about what will happen or how the crew is involved in it. Could it possibly be tied to the planet facing the imminent catastrophe and the decisions Picard will have to make that could save or doom millions?
There's a scene midway through this episode between Picard and Rasmussen that is clearly meant as the centerpiece of the show, where Picard asks Rasmussen for help, and they argue over the ethics of Picard gaining access to information from the future if it means maybe saving millions of lives. It's one of those earnest Trekkian dialogue pieces that seems to be really striving to get somewhere thoughtful and interesting ... but it doesn't quite find its way to a point. Through all of Picard's pontificating and Rasmussen's evasions, they're ultimately just talking in circles and nothing is gained. Eventually I was waiting for crazed Doc Brown to show up, shouting, "It's your kids, Marty! Something's gotta be done about your kids!"
And if there's a bigger problem with "A Matter of Time," it's Rasmussen himself. It becomes difficult to stand the guy after a while, particularly once we know he's up to something fishy (we see him stealing components from various places on the ship). He's the sort of guy who finds an obnoxious and condescending way to make an allegedly wondrous 24th century historic moment all about ... himself. He claims to be a history buff, but he seems more like an overbearing kid trying to shoplift in a candy store while telling you how awesome you are. I tend to think a real observer from the 26th century wouldn't divulge the truth of his origins to those he's observing, and you'd think Picard would be more skeptical given that logical loophole. How does the saying go? You can't study something without inadvertently affecting its outcome. That goes double for time travel. Hell, just talking to Picard could cause the entire future to be erased (like it was/is/will be in Star Trek XI).
I guess we're supposed to find Rasmussen annoying, so we can enjoy the twist and his undoing; it turns out he's actually a con man from the 22nd century, who stole the time shuttle from a guy who was really from the 26th century and came to the 24th century to steal gadgets he could travel back in time to "invent." The scene where the crew confronts him over his thefts is kind of fun. (Data, making a matter-of-fact threat: "I suspect your hand will activate the panel that opens the door whether or not you are conscious.") But I must protest: If you cause a guy from the 22nd century to become trapped in the 24th century, haven't you just changed the past? Or was it always that way???
Previous episode: Unification
Next episode: New Ground

Season Index
9 comments on this review
Rather the timelines branched off so that you have two separate universes. This is one of the common theories to explain how time travel might be possible without creating a paradox.
This has nothing to do with the problems of this episode of course. I agree with everything you say. Just thought I'd correct the above misconception.
First, I here alot of critiscm from the paradox pushers that be being so annoying and loud he was altering the past. I think one thing that never gets mentioned is the obvious fact that if the Enterprise and the Planet are utterly Annihilated!! Right! There is no future to change if no one that meets him is dead. That kept running through my head for the first 40 minutes of this ep when i first watched it. It never gets credit for that.
Second, and following from the first, so what if he steal trinkets? It's not like he was sabotaging engineering. I would be a real historian would find his actions quite realistic, particularily, with the knowledge the Enterprise was in her final hours. I mean seriously, if any of us could Marty McFly back to the last supper of Jesus, we wouldn't try to take a plate or a fork he ate with????
Lastly, I think there is an obsession with robin williams. Look, he is an annoying baffoon. I am so glad he didn't end up being here. If he was here you wouldn't be able to get "Mork on the Enterprise" out of your head the whole episode. Frewer does a fine job of dorky future/past scientist.
1 star.
Really, season one? I agree this episode goes nowhere. But, really? Season one??? The season that featured such unforgettable writing as Tasha's D.A.R.E. Speech? Ok...
EAFP: "The same old story is the one we're meeting now-- self-righteous life-forms who are eager not to learn, but to prosecute to judge anything they don't understand or can't tolerate."
Justice : Data: "Would you choose one life over one-thousand, sir?" Picard : "I refuse to let arithmetic decide questions like that."
My personal favourite however is "Shut up Wesley!"
I liked this episode; with respect, I note the paradox in your reviews that if you like an episode you will forgive the conceits that you will pick on if you didn't like an episode. In that vein, I say that the whole temporal analysis may be a plot hole or a paradox or unlikely, but I accept that conceit given the plot. Besides, remember that this guy is not, in fact, from the 26th century. He’s just pretending. It doesn’t mean he will get everything right. He (I imagine) picked a random day to come to the 24th century.
I think 2.5-3 stars is a fair rating for this one. As you say, ultimately there is no true moral debate here that goes anywhere, mainly because the Doc doesn’t actually have the answers. The episode becomes more about him than about the ‘nail biting’ problem the Enterprise faces. Probably because we all know that the planet won’t end up destroyed. That’s just not TNG. Because Picard must go without the Doc’s advice, there’s no moral issue because things work out anyway. Had the planet been destroyed or Picard chosen some negative path BECAUSE of the Doc’s refusal to help, there would be consequences, but ultimately it’s all for naught.
Submit a comment