Maybe not; but as i don't recall Fish1941 specifying the flaws he found in DS9, it's a little difficult to take his position seriously. Taste is everything in aesthetics (anyone else think that Vertical Features Remake is the greatest film ever made?); but in the absence of any explanation of where the Fish flounders, how can you defend his position?
Fans, what don't you like about DS9?
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
I'm not defending any position. I'm just saying there is a big difference in Opinion and Fact and criticizing TNG's for something you do not like while someone else might, and then calling it a "tangible fact" is outright wrong.
True; but Navaros made one defendable statement of fact (that there was character development in DS9; & that there was little if any of the same in TNG & Voy) & the Fish made none & you are de facto defending his right to make a sensor sweep dismissal. Taking the negative position to Navaros, i could reasonably argue that this character development may not have interested me (& extrapolated from this position that the use of character development in DS9 ultimately limited the success of the show); but it's a little difficult for you to say that it didn't exist. The division isn't so much between Opinion & Fact as between fact (which can be determined), interpretation of fact (which can be argued) & pure opinion (which can usefully be ignored). In the absence of chips of clarification from the Fish himself, i'm assuming that he's offering a pure opinion
Last edited:
He can't, that's why if you ask Fish1941 to expand upon his criticisms of DS9 he ignores you. I'm not trying to criticise the guy because I'm genuinely interested in learning his opinions on the failings of DS9 but whenever I ask him he refuses to give any. And if anybody is critical of Voyager he criticises DS9 instead. Frankly, it's wearing a little thin.
I think that Navaros's claim was that TNG and Voyager had zero character and story development and those are the "tangible facts" he was referring to. Whilst I don't agree that there was absolutely no character or story development on those shows I think it is a fact that there was more of them on DS9 than any of the other series.
Edit: robtclements summed it up very well.
While I liked the idea of exploring the Federation at war and what that would do to its near Utopian society, I disliked how DS9 turned into a war melodrama riffing on old World War II movies, especially in the last couple of seasons. Moreover, I thought the war lasted far too long. Much longer than it should have.
Oh, and Worf and the Klingons especially the former. I never felt Worf or Dorn fit into the series. The less said about his relationship with Jadzia the better. IMO, Dorn and Ferrell had no on-screen chemistry in terms of the Worf/Dax romance.
Oh, and Worf and the Klingons especially the former. I never felt Worf or Dorn fit into the series. The less said about his relationship with Jadzia the better. IMO, Dorn and Ferrell had no on-screen chemistry in terms of the Worf/Dax romance.
Holy crap, his reviews of the Star Wars Prequels are hilarious!!
Aside from a handful of certain episodes, I'm not that fond of S6 either. This is the season in which the Dominion and Cardassia occupied Deep Space 9 in that awful story arc at the beginning of the season . . . and in which Gul Dukat's story arc became a pile of crap.
Holy crap, his reviews of the Star Wars Prequels are hilarious!!
Then I won't read them.
I apologise if you were offended, but as you can see by the poll in this thread the majority of posters here are male so it is normal to assume that is the case. But I unreservedly apologise for suggesting you have a penis.
But here is the perfect thread for you to explain your criticisms of DS9, and I for one would love to hear them. You've already said that Dukat's arc was ruined at the end, and I agree that after Waltz the character floundered and was used too much as an "evil" villain. Feel free to say more, you can use bullet-points if you wish.
Then today is your lucky day as Confused Matthew's reviews are all video reviews, no reading required!Then I won't read them.Holy crap, his reviews of the Star Wars Prequels are hilarious!!
I had no problem with the first one or even the second one, but after the third one the Mirror Universe was sinking quickly into parody.
I consider myself in the minority, here, because I generally prefer the earlier seasons. I didn't like that the war went on for season upon season until the end of the series.
And an overall thing I didn't like, most notably in the later seasons, was how the show was generally written. I often cringed at the wordiness of the dialogue they'd write for these characters. I keep recalling what O'Neil once said about the G'ould in Stargate: SG-1: "C'mon. Nobody really talks like that."
And an overall thing I didn't like, most notably in the later seasons, was how the show was generally written. I often cringed at the wordiness of the dialogue they'd write for these characters. I keep recalling what O'Neil once said about the G'ould in Stargate: SG-1: "C'mon. Nobody really talks like that."
I say the unique speech patterns of the DS9 characters are one of its great strengths, and very reminiscent of TOS in that regard too (especially Spock's speech patterns). The other modern Trek shows for the most part have generic, interchangeable dialogue, which is therefore much, much worse; generic interrchangeable dialogue is always a telltale sign of bad writing in any piece of work.
Having said that, I don't recall any dialogues of DS9 that were overly-wordy. Do you have some examples of characters and dialogues where they have done this?
I'd also say DS9's dialogue is orders of magnitude better & more sophisticated than SG-1. I was once watching an SG-1 episode where there was a dialogue like: "Okay, who has an alien inside you, raise your hand!" and then this dude possessed by an alien raised his hand and said "I do!" or something like that. I couldn't believe how bad and elementary the dialogue was. It was even worse on the show than how I've related it in those post via paraphrasing from memory. I wish I could quote that script verbatim so I could present it here in all of its epic terribleness.
I too prefer the earlier seasons as they were much more the spiritual inheritor of TOS than TNG ever was, imao.
Actually the man said nothing at all after raising his hand.
http://www.twiztv.com/scripts/stargate/season4/stargate-408.htm
If you want to bash SG1 you could at least be accurate about the show.
Kestrel wrote:
"I sometimes felt like the writers cared more about their secondary characters (Martok, Weyoun, Dukat, later Damar, Winn) than their primaries (especially Jake, HOLY COW Jake!)."
And this guy said "Amen". Like many Niners, I thought that the secondary characters were well-written, fairly three dimensional, and added much to the flavor of the show. Most of them, however, worked, as extensions of the show's core main characters , not as ends of themselves (rightly so, I think). Somehow along the line, especially during a large part of the final season, the writers grew a little too overly enamored with their secondaries, to the extent that the plots for many primary characters felt choppy and/or rushed.
"I sometimes felt like the writers cared more about their secondary characters (Martok, Weyoun, Dukat, later Damar, Winn) than their primaries (especially Jake, HOLY COW Jake!)."
And this guy said "Amen". Like many Niners, I thought that the secondary characters were well-written, fairly three dimensional, and added much to the flavor of the show. Most of them, however, worked, as extensions of the show's core main characters , not as ends of themselves (rightly so, I think). Somehow along the line, especially during a large part of the final season, the writers grew a little too overly enamored with their secondaries, to the extent that the plots for many primary characters felt choppy and/or rushed.
For me, Dax was okay in the first few years before the introduction of her interest in Klingons and their ritualistic society. Then when she got involved with Worf, I found her to be the most self-centered, annoying character on the show. I felt nothing when she died. Nothing. I could care less.
Ezri was slightly better. Well, more that I wasn't as annoyed with the character as I was with Jadzia.
I think Jadzia Dax was a failed character, but in an interesting way. As I see it, what happened was the writers had a very strong portrait in mind of who the prior host (Curzon) had been, and little direction for Jadzia herself. So progressively Curzon took over and eventually permeated Jadzia's personality to the point where you end up in the later seasons with a female version of him.
Basically this starts with Blood Oath, where Jadzia decides to fulfill a pact in Curzon's name, but gradually most of the qualities associated with Curzon are absorbed by Jadzia: a certain mischievous quality, impulsiveness, a love of partying, drinking and sex, and of course the affinity for Klingons. Sisko's affectionate "Old Man" (a reference to his friendship with an aging Curzon) is increasingly appropriate as the show progresses.
What's interesting is that this would be exactly the danger if you ever had a symbiotic species of this kind: the prior host would tend to dominate the new, younger and impressionable host, if the prior host's personality had been a particularly powerful one.
I don't think this was intended, but I thought it was interesting.
Very interesting analysis, and I think you're quite right.
As one of my chief gripes with DS9 is the played-out Klingon stuff, I was disappointed in how this was handled.
Similar threads
- Poll
