What is the best series and why?

[Gojira]

I don't think the "best" anything exists because it is all just personal preference.

That being said my favorites are TOS followed very very closely by TNG then VOY.

 

[Kirkman1987]

For me TOS is far and away the greatest. I'm in love with it's characters and sense of fun. For all the complaints about it's dated look or style, I can't think of many shows that are as visually interesting as TOS.

After that I figure DS9 barely edges out TNG. Both are excellent continuations of the franchise. I didn't care for the series that followed.

 

[Saito S]

My order:
DS9
TNG (this is RIGHT behind DS9)
VOY (little more space between TNG and this)
TOS
ENT (couldn't watch more than a handful of eps before giving up)

But really, this

I don't think the "best" anything exists because it is all just personal preference.

is quite true.

I'm intrigued by the phenomenon of dedicated Trek fans not liking TOS. I get that it's a different look from the other shows because it's from such a different time period, but really it's the show that started the franchise and the stories don't suffer from the look of the show. I think BillJ nailed the reason why it remains so good: none of the shows afterwards reached the level of unselfconscious fun and adventure that TOS could get to.


It'd be like a big Star Wars fan saying "yeah, I can watch any of the movies whenever, but I'm just not that into that Episode IV: A New Hope movie. I try to avoid that one."

If I met someone who LOVED Star Wars as a whole, but really disliked A New Hope... I wouldn't bat an eyelash, honestly. I may not agree, but it doesn't strike me as especially noteworthy. A little unusual, sure, but that's all.

And it's not even as unusual, if you ask me, when you talk about TOS vs. modern Trek, because there are greater differences in tone, feel, writing style, etc. between TOS and modern Trek than there are between A New Hope and the other Star Wars movies.

It IS the show that started the franchise; no one would dispute that (at least, I hope no one would... ). But that's about respecting the show, not about how much enjoyment one derives from watching it. And I'm not much bothered by the look of it, personally; that's a relatively minor part of why I don't get as much out of TOS as I do TNG or DS9, or even VOY on that show's better days.

 

[Stoek]

OK, I guess we agree to disagree on TOS' quality.



However, EVERY film or TV show ever created is a product of its time.

*nodding* Mind you I'm not saying it's unwatchable. I've been Netflixing the first season and I've been delighted at how good many of the episodes are. But there is still a kind of mental adjustment I have to make any time I start to get grunchy over things that my modern sensibilities view as flaws. As for the latter portion of your comment, wow yeah, boy you don't know how right you are.

Sometimes even a couple of years can make a huge difference. I borrowed the complete first (and only) season of Alien Nation, a show which I loved to death during it's first run. And while I still enjoyed it immensely, hooo boy. The over all look and tone of the show was just, wow, garish, and very broad. The weird thing is that just a few years later things like Buffy came out that have so changed the way episodic television (especially action/fantasy/sci fi) that honestly one could think there was a decade or more seperating them rather than, off the top of my head about 4 years.

 

[heavylids]

For me TOS is far and away the greatest. I'm in love with it's characters and sense of fun. For all the complaints about it's dated look or style, I can't think of many shows that are as visually interesting as TOS.

I rather enjoy the "dated look" of TOS. But I grew up with the end of TNG and all of DS9, so those are more dear to me. I can't get nostalgic over TOS since I wasn't even alive when it was airing.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Well, thats tough. I have to pick two. TOS and TNG.

TOS started the whole ball rolling. Its a classic and a real fun time.

Now TNG gets credit for being the foundation for DS9 and Voyager. Most of the species encountered in those two were created by TNG. The creativity of that series was the cornerstone of the others. It moved the series up from space opera to a more dynamic and real universe. Which DS9 proceeded to turn into a soap opera and battleground, and one which Voyager toyed with.

 

[RyuRoots]

I'm intrigued by the phenomenon of dedicated Trek fans not liking TOS. I get that it's a different look from the other shows because it's from such a different time period, but really it's the show that started the franchise and the stories don't suffer from the look of the show. I think BillJ nailed the reason why it remains so good: none of the shows afterwards reached the level of unselfconscious fun and adventure that TOS could get to.

It'd be like a big Star Wars fan saying "yeah, I can watch any of the movies whenever, but I'm just not that into that Episode IV: A New Hope movie. I try to avoid that one."

And I'm intrigued by the phenomenon of TOS fans not understanding others not caring for TOS.

It's the first show: who cares? Yes, I acknowledge/respect it as setting the STverse into motion, but that has nothing to do with its quality as a show. IMO, the looks don't hurt it so much as the lack of any kind of subtlety and a very cheesy, obvious way of writing. And like Saito S pointed out, if someone liked Star Wars but not ANH, it...would not really surprise me in the slightest. Different people like different things. Shocking, no? IDIC.

That said...for me, DS9 is the best Star Trek, bar none. It has what is possibly the worst episode in Star Trek history (Profit and Lace...Ira Behr, WHAT DID YOU SMOKE), but also has some great character development, honestly good humor, and some really real, human relationships. Plus some super-cool battle scenes really don't hurt its case.

DS9 > TNG > VOY > TOS >>>>>>>>>Really bad Star Trek comic books>>>>>>>>>>>>> ENT

 

[Navaros]

DS9 is the best. The other Trek shows have either zero, or only a marginal amount of character and story development, yet DS9 has both in spades. In addition, DS9 is also the best-written and best-acted Trek show. On top of that, DS9 avoids a great many of the flaws that the other shows after TOS are collectively plagued with, such as demanding that there be little to no conflict between human characters.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Am I the only person who has watched "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" and thinks "Star Trek: The Next Generation" was better? TNG was more 'safe' and less ambitious since it had less conflict between characters and lacked some of the innovations of DS9 like serialized stories and deeper exploration of certain alien races, but I still think it was more consistent overall.

TNG's first two seasons were weak (as were the first three of DS9), but at least from season 3 onwards it maintained a very consistent quality aside from a bunch of crap in season 7 and the lame Sela stuff. It's easy to overlook some of DS9's problems because of all the things it did amazingly that no other Star Trek series did, but DS9 still had some major story arcs and character development that seriously tainted it. For example, the character assassination of Gul Dukat and all the excruciatingly boring Bajoran stuff in the early seasons.

I think DS9's stories and characters took a lot longer to become bearable than those of TNG. While it has episodes in season 1 better than any in TNG's season 1 ("Duet", for example), I don't think its first two seasons were significantly better than those of TNG. I expect better from a series with creators who should have learned from the mistakes of their last one.

Another thing is, I can't really explain how, but for some reason TNG just seemed more effortlessly iconic to me, with its more sharply defined characters and more resonant self-contained stories. The important TNG episodes just feel more epic. While there was a bit of that during the Dominion arc, too much of DS9 feels like filler to me. It is often very enjoyable filler, but filler nonetheless. Sometimes being self-contained makes something come across more powerful because it stands on its own as opposed to relying on something else (i.e. the Dominion arc) to give it weight.

I think it's Odo and Kira that are the deal breaker for me, making me choose TNG over DS9 when it's a close call. They were just so annoying for the first few seasons, they dragged the whole thing down for me. As I said, there were only three characters in TNG that really irritated me. Only one of them was one of the main cast members for all 7 seasons and Troi wasn't too much of a problem since she was often overshadowed by more interesting stories/character development involving Picard, Riker, Data, and Worf.

I just noticed this, and I have to applaud you for an excellent summation. So, here's to you!

 

[Bishop76]

Am I the only person who has watched "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" and thinks "Star Trek: The Next Generation" was better? TNG was more 'safe' and less ambitious since it had less conflict between characters and lacked some of the innovations of DS9 like serialized stories and deeper exploration of certain alien races, but I still think it was more consistent overall.

TNG's first two seasons were weak (as were the first three of DS9), but at least from season 3 onwards it maintained a very consistent quality aside from a bunch of crap in season 7 and the lame Sela stuff. It's easy to overlook some of DS9's problems because of all the things it did amazingly that no other Star Trek series did, but DS9 still had some major story arcs and character development that seriously tainted it. For example, the character assassination of Gul Dukat and all the excruciatingly boring Bajoran stuff in the early seasons.

I think DS9's stories and characters took a lot longer to become bearable than those of TNG. While it has episodes in season 1 better than any in TNG's season 1 ("Duet", for example), I don't think its first two seasons were significantly better than those of TNG. I expect better from a series with creators who should have learned from the mistakes of their last one.

Another thing is, I can't really explain how, but for some reason TNG just seemed more effortlessly iconic to me, with its more sharply defined characters and more resonant self-contained stories. The important TNG episodes just feel more epic. While there was a bit of that during the Dominion arc, too much of DS9 feels like filler to me. It is often very enjoyable filler, but filler nonetheless. Sometimes being self-contained makes something come across more powerful because it stands on its own as opposed to relying on something else (i.e. the Dominion arc) to give it weight.

I think it's Odo and Kira that are the deal breaker for me, making me choose TNG over DS9 when it's a close call. They were just so annoying for the first few seasons, they dragged the whole thing down for me. As I said, there were only three characters in TNG that really irritated me. Only one of them was one of the main cast members for all 7 seasons and Troi wasn't too much of a problem since she was often overshadowed by more interesting stories/character development involving Picard, Riker, Data, and Worf.

I just noticed this, and I have to applaud you for an excellent summation. So, here's to you!

Yeah, I just saw this myself and have to agree with almost everything. The characters were more iconic because they were more basic archetypes than those presented in DS9. It's the "keep it simple, stupid" mentality at work.

And actually, Odo and Kira's high school relationship in the 4th season (or so) where he was pining for her but afraid to tell her how he felt actually made me walk away from the series and concentrate on Babylon 5. I eventually came back after DS9 was off the air and watched the seasons I missed, but I found them littered pretty liberally with shoddy episodes amidst a handful of gems.

 

[Too Much Fun]

I just noticed this, and I have to applaud you for an excellent summation. So, here's to you!

Yeah, I just saw this myself and have to agree with almost everything. The characters were more iconic because they were more basic archetypes than those presented in DS9. It's the "keep it simple, stupid" mentality at work.

I eventually came back after DS9 was off the air and watched the seasons I missed, but I found them littered pretty liberally with shoddy episodes amidst a handful of gems.

Aw thanks, guys. It's good to know my rambling overanalysis can actually find some appreciation occasionally. I'm really getting tired of this argument that DS9 was automatically better just because it was more ambitious and had more conflict between characters.

I respect that it did those things, but that doesn't mean those choices always lead to enjoyable results. When DS9 really works, I love it as much as any other Star Trek that I love, but they definitely overdid things many times. "Keep it simple, stupid" indeed.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Its my deeply held conviction that excessive complexity in a serial is the death knell of quality. If you can cram the complications into a single episode, it works (TNG Phantasms as an example). But if you make complicated serials you wind up with Enterprise' 'Temporal Cold War.' And that was pants-on-head retarded.

Yes, I did use 'death knell' and 'pants-on-head retarded' in the same paragraph.

 

[RyuRoots]

Frankly, "keeping it simple" is what makes TNG less enjoyable than DS9 to me. There are fewer, shorter character arcs, and interesting concepts were brought back and explored much less often and while it wasn't as bad as Voyager, the show's storytelling style did mean that it got the reset button quite a bit. DS9 isn't automatically better because of conflict or ambition; I like it best because of more thorough exploration of its characters and of the parts of the trek world it's most tied into, because it had more things than the other shows had consequences, and because it had character growth that you can really see, and that feels very organic.

Also, I see nothing wrong with a complex serial. I see a MASSIVE problem with a complicated serial that's written for episodes as the ideas come to you with no plans of any sort. THAT'S why the Temporal Cold War was friggin' stupid if you ask me.

 

[Atticus]

The best series is TOS, no question. No series enters cultural consciousness to such a degree over such a long period of time without having a degree of merit in it, and none of the modern Treks came close to having the effect of Kirk and co.

 

[sonak]

Frankly, "keeping it simple" is what makes TNG less enjoyable than DS9 to me. There are fewer, shorter character arcs, and interesting concepts were brought back and explored much less often and while it wasn't as bad as Voyager, the show's storytelling style did mean that it got the reset button quite a bit. DS9 isn't automatically better because of conflict or ambition; I like it best because of more thorough exploration of its characters and of the parts of the trek world it's most tied into, because it had more things than the other shows had consequences, and because it had character growth that you can really see, and that feels very organic.

Also, I see nothing wrong with a complex serial. I see a MASSIVE problem with a complicated serial that's written for episodes as the ideas come to you with no plans of any sort. THAT'S why the Temporal Cold War was friggin' stupid if you ask me.

I keep seeing this criticism of TNG but I think it's unfair for two reasons

1. TNG premiered in 1987, before serialized storytelling was the big thing on TV

2. It's a criticism of format, not content Twilight Zone and Outer Limits have literally NO episode-to-episode character development because they're anthologies, and yet they're classics of sci-fi.


This criticism of TNG is basically "it's not serialized therefore I don't like it as much."