Behind TNG, certainly. But TOS? I'd love to see the actual ratings numbers for the original run of TOS, even if they're not as detailed as today's numbers. I've seen the chart comparing the ratings of the spin-offs, but no actual numbers for TOS other than recent re-runs. Are they available somewhere?
I'm sure someone will correct me if I am substantially wrong, but I think it got somewhere around 27 million viewers or so. Remember most folks only got the Big 3 networks (if that) so the national ratings pie was only sliced 3 ways). "Inside Star Trek: The real Story" by Herb Solow & Robert Justman gives the info. It is a great read with a lot insight into the production of TOS. From the initial pitch to cancellation. It also gives a more balanced perspective of NBC, Desilu and Roddenberry. Very enlightening. Highly recommend.
You might as well also throw in "the most successful series employing a left-handed Key Grip named Roy" - which is to say, if you define your criteria narrowly enough, you can declare anything "most successful." Hell, DS9 wasn't even the third most successful syndicated TV series during most of its run. Yep. TOS failed on NBC with at least twice as many viewers as TNG succeeded with in syndication.
In a way, the dynamic between Brannon Braga and Ron Moore reminds me of the dynamic between John Lennon and Paul McCartney. Moore's stories always seemed grittier... punching at your gut, while Braga's were more esoteric and more low key. Together, just as with John and Paul, their strengths blended into a superb writing combination. Separately, I prefer the gut punching of Moore and Lennon. Maybe that's why I listen less to McCartney solo stuff vice Lennon's and don't really watch Voyager... a show I often found rather mundane.
Hey Legion, thanks for explaining the joke. Originally I was going to throw in a "It was also the number one sci-fi series featuring a bald, African-American, goatee wearing Captain for most of its run," but felt that would've been too obvious. Tsk. Tsk. Now, let's be "fair." DS9 (after TNG left production) was the #1 SF show in syndi for a couple of seasons (until UPN and CW came around in its final season). Sure it was beaten by Herc and Xena (which were good, solid fantasy shows) and they were all trumped by game and talk shows. Deep Space Nueve was by all measures a success and it did beat-the-snot out of B5. Again, "to be fair," there is a lot of Apples & Oranges comparisons going on within these simple and short retorts, Legion-san. I would submit that even comparing TNG and DS9 is flawed in that the landscape of syndication had changed. TNG was largely unchallanged, but it's success definately led to the field getting a lot more crowded-er (). All one can do, IMO, is look how each series performed relative to their specific times and the prevailing standards of that day. TOS and ENT were considered ratings fails. TNG, VOY and DS9 were considered successes. None of that, however, can be construed as statements speaking to quality, therefore, is of limited value. My opinion.
Sweet-Jesus, I have to stop you there. I understand the point you are trying to make. I can even agree with the spirit of your point, BUT don't ever, EVER compare BB/RDM to the exalted and most-resplendent Sirs John Lennon and Paul McCartney in any way, shape or form! This happens again and expect a lice ridden, carnivorous Tribble down your pants!
Yeah, that's an insane comparison. The Beatles never did anything near as good as Battlestar Galactica seasons 1-3.
Galactica 1980 was the bomb. No re-imaging needed there. Kent McCord could so kick Richard Hatch's sorry backside. And Barry Van Dyke versus Dirk Benedict, please! Dirk would be waving his white socks in surrender. In fact, I always felt Berman and Braga tapped into their inner "Galactica 1980" when producing "Enterprise." Just kidding. "Enterprise" was nowhere near as good. EVER!
NuBSG was awesome. It just set expecations in the first 2.2 seasons that the final 1.8 seasons couldn't hope to meet.