DS9 out of all the Star Trek series is definitely the most palatable to new fans who are used to serialized cable dramas in the vein of Thrones and Breaking Bad. It made the Star Trek universe feel like a real place with real people living in it. It never could completely embrace serialization though, so it sometimes suffered from jarring changes in tone and focus between episodes.
DS9 was ahead of its time
- Thread starter House Stark
- Start date
I dunno. I think, because it's harder to 'jump in' to DS9 at any point, it's probably the Trek show that has done least well in reruns. VOY and TNG rerun a lot here in Aus, but DS9, while it has rerun, is probably more impenetrable to someone who happens to just surf into it.
I'd have to agree. People don't normally associate Star Trek with serialized television. It is rewarding if you get into it, and there's the off chance they might catch one that piques there interest. It's just as likely someone will randomly tune in to Remora or Lemora (whatever it is) and think that DS9 is the worst thing ever made.
Human nature is generally to "get back to normal" as soon as possible, so I didn't find that aspect implausible. In fact, focusing on trying to preserve such institutions could be a great pressure-release valve as if would give desperate people a sense of having some tiny say in their own fates.
I dunno (or some other arrogant utterance) ...
Claiming a show isn't "realistic" because it's science fiction isn't a deep criticism. Indeed, the point the OP was trying to get across was DS9's relevance to today, not its verisimiltude. Television series deal more regularly with the political and social topics today than they did in the 1990s. Consequentially, DS9 seems unique. Unfortunately, "being ahead of its time" isn't necessarily a good thing. DS9 might be more a a clunky forerunner or prototype rather than a trailblazer. (Though given the association with BSG, I think more the latter.)
Claiming a show isn't "realistic" because it's science fiction isn't a deep criticism. Indeed, the point the OP was trying to get across was DS9's relevance to today, not its verisimiltude. Television series deal more regularly with the political and social topics today than they did in the 1990s. Consequentially, DS9 seems unique. Unfortunately, "being ahead of its time" isn't necessarily a good thing. DS9 might be more a a clunky forerunner or prototype rather than a trailblazer. (Though given the association with BSG, I think more the latter.)
Star Trek is as realistic as the writers allow it to be. There's a point where Science Fiction crosses the line. One of the reasons I never minded technobabble in TNG was because, even though it was all dreamed up, it at least served to establish that flying through space and exploring all kinds of strange phenomena wasn't as easy as taking your car down the street. Yeah, it was probably bogus most of the time, but at least they tried to make up for it.
Now if every episode had Larry Niven levels of detail, it would still go over the heads of almost everyone, so it's not the worst thing ever. I would rather they get rid of certain tropes instead of trying to explain thing.
Biggest offenders: too many humanoids, and the star fleet working uniform being good enough for almost any environment. As long as the replicators are kept in check, it's not that bad, and it's becoming more plausible every day with the advances in 3D printers.
Now if every episode had Larry Niven levels of detail, it would still go over the heads of almost everyone, so it's not the worst thing ever. I would rather they get rid of certain tropes instead of trying to explain thing.
Biggest offenders: too many humanoids, and the star fleet working uniform being good enough for almost any environment. As long as the replicators are kept in check, it's not that bad, and it's becoming more plausible every day with the advances in 3D printers.
That's true up to a point, but the first stone was set in the first episode and all writer's have had to hue from that first stone. Transporters, warp drive, replicators, universal translators, sound in space, holodecks, aliens that look like humans with makeup on- it's all essentially unrealistic. But that was all meant to be backdrop to what was basically an anthology show. Star Trek's never been that interested in long term consequences, they always just drove on to the next star system, the next adventure. DS9 was different because it *was* interested in consequences, which makes it comparatively more realistic, but the universe that Trek envisions overall is unrealistic- no one writer, or even team of writers, can really go against that grain.
I don't think ANY of ST is very plausible in the sense that I don't really believe mankind will ever settle its differences and "reach the stars". I think it'is a fun and interesting flight of fancy. I think Blade Runner is the most realistic SF movie/tv show I've ever seen as far as the dystopian future it presents where people are still pretty rotten and yet mankind has still managed to limp along somehow.
Sure, but at the end of the day Star Trek is a TV show, not a documentary of what it would be like. It's really hard to call up Central Casting and get nonhumanoid actors, and even if you could, your audience wouldn't understand their reactions and would probably find them repulsive.
I think it's possible but not very likely for humanity to put aside its differences. Or if not put them aside, at least learn to nonviolently tolerate its differences. As for reaching the stars, well, that would require relativity to be wrong. Although there could be some Ender's Game version of it where relativity is taken into account and we find completely unhumanlike aliens.
It's entirely possible in the future we find a planet that can support human life and a colony of humans fly off toward it at relativistic speeds, and...infect the natives with horrible diseases... *sigh*
But science fiction has always been about the writers exploring their ideas about the direction humanity directly by sticking them in an entirely open, invented context.
The thing about E.T. is that they gave him human-like facial expressions. The one thing common to all human culture throughout the globe is that we all recognize basic facial expressions the same way. If E.T. expressed happiness the same way humans express anger and disgust, nobody would have liked him.
It's entirely possible in the future we find a planet that can support human life and a colony of humans fly off toward it at relativistic speeds, and...infect the natives with horrible diseases... *sigh*
But science fiction has always been about the writers exploring their ideas about the direction humanity directly by sticking them in an entirely open, invented context.
The thing about E.T. is that they gave him human-like facial expressions. The one thing common to all human culture throughout the globe is that we all recognize basic facial expressions the same way. If E.T. expressed happiness the same way humans express anger and disgust, nobody would have liked him.
Its been said that Sci-Fi/Fantasy is often the modern equivalent of the Western of the 1920's-1950's: a means to discuss social, moral and ethical dilemmas with the backdrop of an idealized and entertaining parallel universe with its own tropes/clichés/set pieces. Westerns in outer space, so to generalize.
I love my 70s and 80s TV, but dramas back then were really cookie-cutter, and the only characters who could get away with being morally gray tended to be title characters (and even then, they were only gray because they were rebelling against a system). Other than that, most dramas were rather straight-forward, with no real philosophic or indepth discussion about morals.
Going out of style is one thing -- but bringing them *in* style is something else entirely. Now, I'm not saying that DS9 was a trailblazer in that regard, but it took advantage of taking the gray round when required. And DS9 as we know it could only have happened outside of the 70s and 80s.
Agreed. These themes are all over the place in literature, but that's because they can afford the space, pacing, and maybe even less publicity. But viewers are smart, and add in more complex themes and people get hooked; indeed, if one's an avid book reader, there's a bit of a thrill to see themes actually translated to moving pictures.
On a tangent, we on this board love to talk about how different the first two seasons of TNG are from the rest of the show. But while most of that talk is about style and special effects and music, I really do think some of the later seasons showed more risks and more complexity that would've been risky earlier on. Thankfully, the show was no longer on the verge of cancellation, no longer threatened by a writers' strike, and the production crew seemed more assured with each season.
ET is cute and was designed to be so. Just about every design choice from the big eyes to the hairless body was made for humans to go "Oooooooooo, how cute".
I would think so too, but the disgusting alien in ET was somehow considered cute by millions of people. I even got in trouble for hating him in school when they made us watch it.
Actually, when DS9 started I thought it was obviously influenced by the tensions of the first gulf war. Paranoia about the govt was also around (hence the X Files), also the terrorism of the IRA and PLO were contemporary or recently past.
The more things change....
ENT's ground-breaking Xindi arc was more obviously a reaction to 9/11, but at the same time it couldn't have happened without DS9's Dominion wars. Unlike DS9 they were able to omit the stand-alone episodes (mostly).
ENT was obviously more cinematic in appearance, but that makes me wonder: Are we ever going to see a widescreen version of DS9? (Apologies if this has been discussed before.)
Hew.
Ahead of it's time? Not so much. Hill Street Blues was ahead of it in most of the dramatic aspects cited by over a decade.
I'd like to shoot ET with a death ray, then we can have peace.
I will say that looking back at DS9, you can tell that they didn't feel limited and were absolutely willing to try new things. I think one of the most realistic episodes is Valiant, and it shows the absurdity of putting a crew of wiz kids in charge of anything. A lot of people may have problems with the bad acting or the simplemindedness of the characters. Having gone to military school and seeing how people act before they grow up, I think it was completely realistic. That was kind of the anti-anime episode. The best part is where Jake basically says how stupid their death-wish plan is, and we see it play out. It really reinforces Sisko as a badass and a soldier's soldier without making him into a fanatic.
I will say that looking back at DS9, you can tell that they didn't feel limited and were absolutely willing to try new things. I think one of the most realistic episodes is Valiant, and it shows the absurdity of putting a crew of wiz kids in charge of anything. A lot of people may have problems with the bad acting or the simplemindedness of the characters. Having gone to military school and seeing how people act before they grow up, I think it was completely realistic. That was kind of the anti-anime episode. The best part is where Jake basically says how stupid their death-wish plan is, and we see it play out. It really reinforces Sisko as a badass and a soldier's soldier without making him into a fanatic.
Similar threads
