Episodes that are considered "good" that you actually dislike

[WraithDukat]

Well yes but they don't really go around shooting everything in site on the non JJ stuff do they?

I cringe everytime I hear 'the Federation is a peace keeping Armada' lol.

Also the warp effect on 09 is a total rip off of Hyperspace.

 

[hbquikcomjamesl]

About all ST and SW have in common is that they are examples of storytelling in an interstellar milieu in which FTL transportation and communication, and sentient life coming in every imaginable shape, are facts of life.

But ST is about people on a mission to explore strange new worlds, seek out new life and new civilizations, and boldly go where none have gone before. Whereas SW is about a moderate libertarian-populist faction involved in a protracted conflict with a totalitarian-elitist-racist faction. (And Cattlecar Gigantica, and probably also Lost in Space are about humans on the run -- yes, even though VOY was also about people on the run, in the form of a Federation/Maquis crew stuck in a remote part of the Galaxy, trying to get home, it was still about people who rarely forgot that they were explorers first, last, and always.

It's not about the setting; that's only a tool of the storyteller. It's about the kind of story being told. (Which is to say that WKRP in Cincinnati would have worked, albeit with a different look, sound, and feel, if it were set in a country-western station, or even a classical station.)

 

[JRoss]

City on the Edge of Forever
Measure of a Man
Homeward (if it has any fans)

 

[johnnybear]

So, basically, you don't like Star Trek at all...

Who does?
JB

 

[PureCrimson]

People have mentioned movies, so I guess it still counts.

I'm baffled at how genuine TNG fans not only praise First Contact, but site it as one of their favorites. Despite the fact it completely reverses and misses the point of Picard and how he feels about the Borg, which is even shown post-assimilation in the series, where he still doesn't want them all dead. But now in this movie, he does because.... movie?

That said, First Contact isn't a bad movie at all, but as someone who values characters, progression, and characterization most in my stories, such a blatant backpedaling irks me.

Also, it was one of the first steps into turning Trek from genuine slow science fiction into action schlock, which is where it's at now, and I am not happy about that.

 

[CorporalClegg]

Well yes but they don't really go around shooting everything in site on the non JJ stuff do they?

Both the first ever filmed (well, technically second) and first ever aired episodes of Star Trek featured firefights. Plenty of shooting to go around.

Similarly, if you think that, given the opportunity and means, if the W359 had ever shown up on screen in full glory it wouldn't have looked a lot like the Death Star battle, you're kidding yourself.

I cringe everytime I hear 'the Federation is a peace keeping Armada' lol.

It was oversimplification for the audience's benefit. I cringe whenever someone suggests it matters. Certainly, there are much greater offenses to be found throughout the films.

Also the warp effect on 09 is a total rip off of Hyperspace

And the ones in the TOS films weren't?

About all ST and SW have in common is that they are examples of storytelling in an interstellar milieu in which FTL transportation and communication, and sentient life coming in every imaginable shape, are facts of life.

But ST is about people on a mission to explore strange new worlds, seek out new life and new civilizations, and boldly go where none have gone before. Whereas SW is about a moderate libertarian-populist faction involved in a protracted conflict with a totalitarian-elitist-racist faction. (And Cattlecar Gigantica, and probably also Lost in Space are about humans on the run -- yes, even though VOY was also about people on the run, in the form of a Federation/Maquis crew stuck in a remote part of the Galaxy, trying to get home, it was still about people who rarely forgot that they were explorers first, last, and always.

It's not about the setting; that's only a tool of the storyteller. It's about the kind of story being told. (Which is to say that WKRP in Cincinnati would have worked, albeit with a different look, sound, and feel, if it were set in a country-western station, or even a classical station.)

And you're missing the point entirely by cherry-picking specifics.

The point here is that Star Trek is a Lincoln Continental. Star Wars is a Mustang. At no point was either an F-150, but they both often drove like a Mercury Cougar.

To put it another way, Star Trek was Wagon Train an Star Wars the Kurosawa clones. Their plot and thematic tones might differ from time to time, but in the end, they're still both shoot-em-up adventure westerns.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Wagon Train wasn't a shoot-em-up adventure Western...it was a dramatic semi-anthology series.

 

[Gary7]

People have mentioned movies, so I guess it still counts.

I'm baffled at how genuine TNG fans not only praise First Contact, but site it as one of their favorites. Despite the fact it completely reverses and misses the point of Picard and how he feels about the Borg, which is even shown post-assimilation in the series, where he still doesn't want them all dead. But now in this movie, he does because.... movie?

I think it was a logical progression... because he was challenged by Admiral Satie about his choice not to eliminate the Borg when he had the chance and later, there was a point where Picard expressed some retrained regret about it. Now the Borg were going so far as to slip back into time to assimilate human beings before they had even the slightest chance to fight back. They won't give up. And now... he's pissed as all hell at them.

 

[Gary7]

I don't really care much for "The Trouble with Tribbles." It does have some entertaining aspects to it and it's the first time we really see a Federation space station featured in a TOS episode, but the premise is all rather silly... much like "Cat's Paw" in that it's more about being intentionally funny or campy. I don't think it deserves the level of praise that it gets. I also find it astonishing that both Spock and McCoy were so negligent in their assessment of the tribble creatures right up front. Had they done their jobs, they'd have known that the fuzzy buggers were a real danger to the ship's environment, breeding much faster than rabbits, and been more proactive to contain them. Also, those K-7 station grain stores are 23rd century equipment... and I can't believe that tribbles would be able to sneak inside without someone making a terribly dumb mistake of leaving an open port for them to crawl through. Tribbles don't move fast. They also can't seem to slip through doorway gaps. So their abundant population would only be roughly where people left them, like in crew quarters and recreation rooms. Nobody in their right mind would bring a tribble to the bridge (unauthorized animal).

One related episode I really do like is Trials and Tribble-ations. The DS9/TOS crossover was so very well done.

 

[kirk55555]

I'll do one popular episode that I dislike for each series (minus STD):

TOS
City on the Edge of Forever

TNG
The Inner Light (This is my least favorite episode on this list)

DS9:
Far Beyond the Stars (This is a very close second behind TIL, and a top 3 worst DS9 episode for me)

VOY:
Bride of Chaotica (this was hard because I like most popular Voyager episodes, but this one I just found boring and I'd rewatch stuff like Threshold before rewatching this)

ENT:
In a Mirror, Darkly (This isn't the worst thing ever, I don't really "dislike" it, but its extremely overrated and not one I'd generally go out of my way to rewatch)

 

[Nerys Myk]

I agree with Space Seed. I don't dislike...but it's vastly overrated.

Being the source for TWOK is it's main positive feature. (and Ricardo of course)

 

[Qonundrum]

A show ostensibly about human nature and the human condition, the episodes that claim computers are better than people or, indeed, are even people. Which means you wouldn't find many if any in TOS but you'll find scores of them in 80s/90sTrek and rest assured, no Trek episode used Data as an allegory for Asperger's Syndrome. Barclay got that job.

 

[PureCrimson]

I think it was a logical progression... because he was challenged by Admiral Satie about his choice not to eliminate the Borg when he had the chance and later, there was a point where Picard expressed some retrained regret about it. Now the Borg were going so far as to slip back into time to assimilate human beings before they had even the slightest chance to fight back. They won't give up. And now... he's pissed as all hell at them.

But he still hated them during the first battle, before he knew what their plan and the extent they were willing to go even was. For me, from the start of the movie, it seems like the reason given why he hates them is because of his Best of Both Worlds episode experience, when it didn't bother him before.

Just seemed sloppy to me.

 

[Armus]

Being the source for TWOK is it's main positive feature. (and Ricardo of course)

Not to be an irritating contrarian but I enjoy Space Seed as much as TWOK, due to the face to face interaction between Ricardo and Shat, which has more energy than view screen conversations. Both actors have such authority and screen presence. I think if Mcgivers wasn't presented as such a bimbo the episode would have been much better.

 

[eschaton]

It's all space adventure with laser guns, bizarre creatures, and blue aliens. The common eulogization of Star Trek implying it's anything more than that is pretentious bullshit.

***Heck, I'll even go so far to say that Star Trek is more like Star Wars than Marvel is like DC.

The two are - more or less - opposite sides of the SFnal spectrum.

Star Wars is barely even sci-fi, though it does have roots in the pulphouse fiction of the early 20th century. It's basically space fantasy, complete with wizards, swordfights, magic, royalty, heroes, and lengthy discussions about destiny. The first Star Wars movie in particular can sort of be seen as a western adaptation of a Japanese Samurai movie (Lucas has been open about how Kurosawa influenced his film-making).

Star Trek, on the other hand had roots in, if not hard sci-fi, science-fiction which took itself more seriously, with real sci-fi writers like Theodore Sturgeon, Harlan Ellison, and (by TAS) Larry Niven all contributing. The Trek world has lots of weird stuff going on, but the attitude of the show is that the "mysteries" are all explainable. No godlike being should ever be worshiped, because it's just some hyper-advanced energy being, nothing less or more. The protagonists of the shows, although they do heroic things, are nothing like the heroes of Star Wars, because they're just normal (albeit competent) people doing the best they can. Discussions of absolute good and evil are mostly absent - most antagonists, even if they desire to harm our protagonists, are shown to be just motivated by different interests, not to be true monsters. Where Trek does take influence from other non-SFnal sources, it's mostly office drama, westerns, and other genres which Star Wars has dipped into relatively infrequently.

 

[eschaton]

To put it another way, Star Trek was Wagon Train an Star Wars the Kurosawa clones. Their plot and thematic tones might differ from time to time, but in the end, they're still both shoot-em-up adventure westerns.

Didn't see this before I replied. I still disagree, because the "adventure" element of Trek is just one flavor - and often the least successful. Who watched Voyager, for example, for the drama-free five-minute scene in the last 10 minutes where the crew pretended to shake around and Kim couldn't get a lock before they finally disabled the engines of the other ship?

What made Trek interesting most consistently was the drama, not the space adventure, whether it be the issue-based drama in "message" episodes or the character-related drama in the episodes with a personal focus. "Action Trek" is mostly shite, except when it's used to showcase one or both of those.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The two are - more or less - opposite sides of the SFnal spectrum.

No.

Star Trek is barely even sci-fi, though it does have roots in the pulphouse fiction of the early 20th century.

FTFY

It's basically space fantasy, complete with wizards, swordfights, magic, royalty, heroes, and lengthy discussions about destiny.

Star Trek has had all these things.

Star Trek, on the other hand had roots in, if not hard sci-fi, science-fiction which took itself more seriously, with real sci-fi writers like Theodore Sturgeon, Harlan Ellison, and (by TAS) Larry Niven all contributing.

This is the 'pretentious bullshit' part. That's not to say they aren't all outstanding scribes, it's just that there's no such thing as real sci-fi.

No godlike being should ever be worshiped, because it's just some hyper-advanced energy being, nothing less or more.

Which is also like the fundamental conceit of Star Wars.

The protagonists of the shows, although they do heroic things, are nothing like the heroes of Star Wars, because they're just normal (albeit competent) people doing the best they can.

2/3 (+1 Wookie) of the original Star Wars heroes were "just normal." And the other guy was normal through 4/5ths of the film. Altogether, Star Wars has had way more norms than wizos.

On the other hand, Star Trek's two most celebrated characters possess super-intelligence. Plus Bashir. And then there's the guy who can literally become anything. Or the gal(s) who were, for all intents and purposes, immortal.

Discussions of absolute good and evil are mostly absent - most antagonists, even if they desire to harm our protagonists, are shown to be just motivated by different interests, not to be true monsters.

You're way overselling "most Star Trek antagonists" here. There's plenty of evil because evil (dressed in Shakespeare/Dickens quotes) to go around. And Star Wars baddies have always had plenty of motive. Well, except Ren. No idea what he's on about.

Where Trek does take influence from other non-SFnal sources, it's mostly office drama, westerns, and other genres which Star Wars has dipped into relatively infrequently.

And so does Star Wars, especially outside of film. But if we stick strictly to film, I'd argue Star Trek's focus has been way more singular over the years.

I still disagree, because the "adventure" element of Trek is just one flavor

"Adventure" is literally part of the brand tagline.

and often the least successful.

Huh? How is TMP/WOK/FC/TVH anything but adventure?

Who watched Voyager, for example, for the drama-free five-minute scene in the last 10 minutes where the crew pretended to shake around and Kim couldn't get a lock before they finally disabled the engines of the other ship?

Wut?

What made Trek interesting most consistently was the drama, not the space adventure,

These two things are not mutually exclusive. Besides, drama is inherent (and thus vital) to all -you know- drama.

"Action Trek" is mostly shite, except when it's used to showcase one or both of those.

This is pretty disingenuous coming from someone with a DS9-related avatar.

 

[Gary7]

^ That's a nice example of someone getting Cleggified.

 

[CorporalClegg]

 

[Wowbagger]

"Barge of the Dead"