"The Inner Light"
"In the Pale Moonlight"
"Broken Bow"
"In the Pale Moonlight"
"Broken Bow"
Episodes that are considered "good" that you actually dislike
- Thread starter uniderth
- Start date
I know many DS9 fans love "The Die is Cast", and while I enjoyed "Improbable Cause" as a good mystery, I thought "The Die is Cast" was overrated. The scenes with Garak and Tain reminiscing just rambled on, and why a starfleet admiral would suggest promoting Sisko after he directly violated orders is beyond me.
What do you mean? Blink of an Eye is generally well regarded.
Irritating. That, it definitely was.
After hearing "Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra … Shaka, when the walls fell … Temba, his arms open", etc.
uttered for the umpteenth time, I wanted Dathon to just shove his Shaka up his Temba, metaphorically speaking, that is.Besides, there is no way that a species that can speak only in metphors could evolve into a technologically advanced, space faring civilization. For one thing, science and engineering and navigation require precision and attention to detail. You can't communicate that with metaphors.
Also, for two parties to understand what a metaphor is referring to, they would have to know the same history. If both parties don't know what Tanagra, Temba etc. are, the reference is meaningless. Even if both parties know the same history, each could have a different interpretation of the same metaphor. It is not a practical nor efficient way to communicate.
I could suspend disbelief, but that was ridiculous.
It's Only A Paper Moon
The actors did a great job with script given. But even more than The Visitor and In The Pale Moonlight, this felt like they were deliberately and strategically tugging and pulling at audiences heart-strings in a strategic and very cynical way. By this stage in series I think I knew Nog (I hope) and didn't need his recovery spelt out to me in such an obvious and didactic manner.
But I never liked Fontaine anyway. He always felt to me like the writer/producers fwank service.
The actors did a great job with script given. But even more than The Visitor and In The Pale Moonlight, this felt like they were deliberately and strategically tugging and pulling at audiences heart-strings in a strategic and very cynical way. By this stage in series I think I knew Nog (I hope) and didn't need his recovery spelt out to me in such an obvious and didactic manner.
But I never liked Fontaine anyway. He always felt to me like the writer/producers fwank service.
De-bug the computer, it has a virus.
From that, someone from I.T. would understand their next job assignment.
Inner Light, a great vehicle for Steward's acting ability, but the story itself felt like a waste of time.
The Measure of a Man, what reduces this for me is that if I put aside being a fan and loving Data and was objective I would have found against Data. To be honest I don't think Picard came anywhere near proving his case, it felt like Data "won" sole because he's a main character.
Augment Arc (ENT), Khan was compelling, complex and yes macho. The augments on ENT were stupid whiners.
I'm currently slogging through TNG. 
Whatever episodes are considered good in TNG, I consider bad. I haven't even seen them all yet, but I'm like five seasons in so far and I haven't really liked any of them. There isn't one character in the entire cast I really like. So yeah I'm pretty safe saying probably any of what is considered good TNG episodes I consider bad. They might still surprise me, but I doubt it.
Whatever episodes are considered good in TNG, I consider bad. I haven't even seen them all yet, but I'm like five seasons in so far and I haven't really liked any of them. There isn't one character in the entire cast I really like. So yeah I'm pretty safe saying probably any of what is considered good TNG episodes I consider bad. They might still surprise me, but I doubt it.
1. The frequently misquoted J.B.S. Haldane said,
2. Over a decade ago, Christopher L. Bennett came up with an explanation ("Friends With the Sparrows," in The Sky's The Limit).
3. For my own part, my headcanon was that the Children of Tama had spent a great deal of time under some off-planet imperial thumb (a notion that also surfaced in my Borg origin fanfic short story), and had overthown their oppressors by evolving a purely metaphorical language, which eventually became their dominant form of communication, to the point where other forms of communication were inconceivable. But I think Mr. Bennett's explanation works better.
I am not familiar with Christopher Bennett. Never heard of him or his work, but I don't doubt that he is a lot smarter and knowledgeable than I am.
From my own limited imagination, I see a lot of problems with a metaphor-only speaking species. I mentioned two of them in my previous post. If the people of a society can not say what they mean and mean what they say, it would be a mess.
Dathon sounded like a broken record. He couldn't come up with different expressions to explain himself. He was stuck with one metaphor for one idea. Compare that to Picard. Picard could express ideas without referring to events or people that Dathon might never have heard of. He varied his vocabulary and expressions in order to connect with Dathon.
Dathon couldn't do that.
Dathon was a one trick pony, or should I say, a one trick Tamarian, as that is what his species is called.
I watched it not too long ago, it was an interesting concept that got grating by the second commercial break.
Apparently he writes books or something.
Novelist that has written quite a few Trek books over the last decade-and-a-half. He is a poster here, mainly in Trek Literature.
Every episode of Star Trek Discovery.
Very active in SF&F as well.
Thank you all for the info about Christopher Bennett.
I just finished reading the "Friends with the Sparrows" story with google books. There were a number of pages that were omitted, though. I guess I am suppose to buy the book to find out what were in those omitted pages.
I just finished reading the "Friends with the Sparrows" story with google books. There were a number of pages that were omitted, though. I guess I am suppose to buy the book to find out what were in those omitted pages.
That is generally what you should do (or borrow from a library).
Thought of another one: TOS's "The Enterprise Incident." I really want to like this episode (a Mission: Impossible style espionage mission to steal a Romulan cloaking device sounds fun), but it ultimately just gets too goofy and cheesy for me to enjoy very much. I think what really sinks it for me is Joanne Linville's performance as the Romulan Commander. She's supposed to be an intelligent commander, the Romulan equivalent of Captain Kirk, but she just seems easily fooled throughout the story, forgetting all of her command responsibilities and common sense just because she's attracted to Spock. And even worse, we're asked to believe at the end that the attraction was mutual! I just can't buy that Spock would ever be interested in someone so gullible.
People talk about Linville as one of the most memorable guest stars on TOS, but I just don't see it. I prefer to imagine what someone like Honor Blackman would've done in the role.
People talk about Linville as one of the most memorable guest stars on TOS, but I just don't see it. I prefer to imagine what someone like Honor Blackman would've done in the role.
I tend to chose Tapestry over Inner light. They both have pretty much the same theme, but I always liked Tapestry better.
In a Mirror Darkly hasn't enough going on for two episodes. I know that's not a single episode ( and more than enough posters have interpreted dislike as overrated), but 50% of the two parter is gratuitous mustache twirling that should have been excised.
So, I'm interested: I'm not sure if it's actually considered a good episode overall, but what do you guys think about "Patterns Of Force" from TOS?
I'm asking because I, coming from Germany, love the episode, but I experienced that a huge part of the german Star Trek fandom seems to hate it actually. And I wonder why... I mean, yeah, it might be a bit "striking" in some points and I think that many people, especially in my home country, have difficulties to deal with films or shows that speak about national socialism. For me, the episode makes an important statement against that and well, actually even though the episode is about 50 years old, speaking out against national socialism and racism is something that's still relevant and important nowadays - and I actually find some irony in the fact that especially here in Germany the episode was or is received so badly ^^ So I'm interested in what you guys from other country think about it?
Reminds me a bit of the WW2 - film "Fury" with Brad Pitt actually, which I also liked a lot by the way. From all I heard it was quite a success in the USA, but here in Germany people detested it
I'm asking because I, coming from Germany, love the episode, but I experienced that a huge part of the german Star Trek fandom seems to hate it actually. And I wonder why... I mean, yeah, it might be a bit "striking" in some points and I think that many people, especially in my home country, have difficulties to deal with films or shows that speak about national socialism. For me, the episode makes an important statement against that and well, actually even though the episode is about 50 years old, speaking out against national socialism and racism is something that's still relevant and important nowadays - and I actually find some irony in the fact that especially here in Germany the episode was or is received so badly ^^ So I'm interested in what you guys from other country think about it?
Reminds me a bit of the WW2 - film "Fury" with Brad Pitt actually, which I also liked a lot by the way. From all I heard it was quite a success in the USA, but here in Germany people detested it
Similar threads
