Favourite Trek Series (and why)

[kythe]

My preferences:

DS9: This show took a while to grow on me since the first couple of seasons moved a bit slowly. But once they started on the Dominion war arc, it became my favorite of all of the Star Treks. They really did well at addressing tough issues involved with religion, war, and many ethical dilemmas. The character development between seasons 3-6 was outstanding.

TNG - A very close second for me in terms of favorites. I notice many people are saying it is dated, but I haven't noticed. Maybe I'm really dated too . The characters had great chemistry with each other and the show really held together in a spirit of space exploration that TOS had begun. TNG claims some of the best single episodes of all of Star Trek.

TOS - I love the concept and the main characters, and have read a good number of novels based on this series. But it doesn't rank among my top favorites because it is very dated in special effects and general portrayal of women.

Voyager - It had a very good premise and I want to like it, but it just felt too much like a TNG take-off. Even aside from the problems with Q and with the Borg, they hit the "reset" button way too many times with problems they came across. There was a really good two-part episode called "Year of Hell" which I think should have been a story arc that covered the entire season rather than just a problem-of-the-week. It would have given Voyager some real depth that it never allowed itself to have.

Enterprise - It had so much more potential than it lived up to. I stopped watching after the first season because it was so boring, the first Star Trek I can say that about. I later started watching it again with re-runs, but the show just had a way of ruining everything I "knew" about Star Trek instead of being a decent back-story. I was glad to see it cancelled.

 

[Cakes488]

Wow, Cakes488, your Trek experience is exactly the inverse of mine. I've seen pieces of a couple episodes of TOS and nothing at all of TAS.

And give DS9 a while to get going. It improves dramatically starting in 3rd season (although there's enough decent episodes before then, particularly in S2, and "Duet" in S1 is excellent.)

Doesn't get good until the 3rd season! LOL I'll stick with it thanks to Netflix.

Well you need to treat yourself to some TOS my friend! To be honest I never saw TAS until couple of years ago...I had reservations, like how good can this possibly be?? But it was economical to purchase and I was absolutely shocked at how good it was (the writing). It was like seeing some fresh new episodes after all this time!! Of course that only lasted one season too...it's seems the best Treks are the most short lived. ( i know i'm biased)

"Doesn't get really good" still means pretty good, particularly S2.
Looking at a list of episodes from DS9 S1/2, talking off the top of my head:

S1: "Emissary" may be the best pilot of the modern Treks (Caretaker is the only one that can vie for that spot; Voyager may have its flaws, but it's first season, compared to the other modern Treks, was quite strong.) "Past Prologue" introduces Garak (Garak always makes episodes better, I promise - at least, as long as he's not Mirror Universe Garak, a comment you'll understand after "Crossover" in S2.) "Captive Pursuit" and "In the Hands of the Prophets" are decent, and "Q-Less" is worth watching, if only for one scene/famous dialogue exchange. The low point comes mid-season, with "Move Along Home" and "The Passenger," particularly the latter. "Duet" belongs right up there with the best of any of Trek.

And S2 is actually a lot stronger than I remembered. The Circle trilogy that kicks off the season, Invasive Procedures, The Wire, Crossover, Blood Oath...there are actually a lot of episodes that fall into "pretty good," and the "okay" ones include things like a couple of episodes that fall into the oh-so-popular "torture O'Brien" category (never really my favorite genre). The standout of the season is "Necessary Evil," and the worst one is either "Melora" or "Rivals."

So...maybe you'll have to wait out a little of S1 before it's very good, but S3 and beyond really raise the bar from good to awesome. (And the first season of any show tends to be a little rough - S1 of TNG is really and truly godawful.) I absolutely love DS9, so it gets a really big "recommend" from me, even if the first season is a little uneven (and mostly uneven in the sense the first season feels a little like it's trying to be TNG; once they figure out their direction and really get going with it, it rocks.)

As for TOS, perhaps I might start with watching TWOK first? I'm not sure if I want to invest the money in DVDs for a show I'm not sure if I'll like (and, besides, I've got a lot ahead of it in my queue - I'm a latecomer to nuBSG and have S3, S4, S4.5, and a couple TV movies to watch, and after that, I was thinking about buying VOY on DVD.) I was considering buying some of the movies anyway (I don't own any of the TNG movies, either), and if they've got some sort of box set, I might try to get the TOS movies along with them.

In particular, what appeals to you about TOS and TAS?

Well I promise that I'll give DS9 a fair chance....since your que is so backed up this is what you should do.....rent one episode of TOS and see if you like it...you could even rent space seed and then twok that would be a perfect marriage. I think if you like space seed then you'll like TOS, it's certainly one of the "better" episodes. If you just want to do a ToS episode rent mirror mirror...I mean there is no way you're not going to like it!!! Yeah I know about BSG...it's getting rave reviews in all my local papers etc now that the show is friggin over...so I'm wondering do I get involved with that too LOL ???

I've been trying to figure out exactly what it is about TOS that has me wrapped around it's finger, because I definitely don't care about any other show to this magnitude...but when I watch TOS it's like seeing old friends, I love their camraderie and thier loyalty to one another. I love their different acting styles and it made me believe that these men could of existed....I love how the show "broke ground" back in the 60's in oh so many ways. The soundtrack is also excellent...Just about all of it is top notch. When I was younger I often wondered why they didn't go a little deeper and develop the characters more...in hindsight I think that perhaps that's helping with it's longevity and it's timelessness it's less like a soap opera and more of a sci-fi show on a mission with touches of personality & fun thrown in.

TAS is not as good as TOS but I still think it's excellent. Especially after so many years without seeing anything new and then to be so pleasantly surprised. The show should of been an hour long...it needed to be an hour long..some of the stories are a little complicated and to wrap it up in a half hour is just too quick but this was supposed to be a kids cartoon, we must remember that but they def. didn't dumb it down for the kids. IMO I liked it and would recommed it to a TOS lover.

 

[Cakes488]

As for TOS, perhaps I might start with watching TWOK first? I'm not sure if I want to invest the money in DVDs for a show I'm not sure if I'll like (and, besides, I've got a lot ahead of it in my queue - I'm a latecomer to nuBSG and have S3, S4, S4.5, and a couple TV movies to watch, and after that, I was thinking about buying VOY on DVD.) I was considering buying some of the movies anyway (I don't own any of the TNG movies, either), and if they've got some sort of box set, I might try to get the TOS movies along with them.

In particular, what appeals to you about TOS and TAS?

May I offer an opinion?

I'm a big DS9 fan myself (and I also got into nuBSG on DVDs recently) who hadn't seen TOS or TAS until last year. I had seen all of modern Trek but never had the opportunity to check TOS out, and once that opportunity arose I took it.

What made it work for me was the characters. I know it is a bit of a cliche to say this about TOS, but you really fall in love with the characters on the show and they do have terrific banter going on. Even a bad episode like Bread and Circuses is elevated by what I consider to be the best Spock/McCoy scene in the show, and when you add in great characters like Kirk, Scotty and Chekov you have some really memorable scenes.

The effects are awful (unless you watch the remastered versions) the stories are a little familiar since you have probably seen them all before repeated on later Trek series, but those characters are the core of it all. I don't think it is as good as DS9, but it is definitely worth checking out.

However I found TAS to be quite the bore. I watched it for completion's sake, but if you aren't worried about not having seen every official episode of Trek then you should probably give it a pass.

I would like to address the awful effects observation you've made. I guess by today's standard they could be considered as awful....but when you realize this show was filmed over 40 years ago on a tight budget.... I think they did a WONDERFUL job with what little they had. You really realize how little it was when you read the behind the scenes info (thier books etc...) the effects have never bothered me except for the strings in catspaw...that's bothered me since I saw it but other than that i'm good. Sorry you didn't like TAS! It's amazing how opinions can differ huh, but that is what makes the world go round....

 

[Eddie Roth]

the original invention of the parallel Earth

*hust* Miri *hust*

Well, yeah, you're right, of course. What I meant was that Bread was the first produced episode to do something with the concept. Miri only showed a planet that (ridiculously) looked exactly like Earth, probably so that they could justify filming in standing sets and on location. The story didn't really play with historical "what if" scenarios.

 

[Captain Randy Hall]

Top of the line is Classic Trek, the one that started it all and stilll interests me no matter how many times I see it. Kirk is an iconic character, as are Spock and McCoy and all the rest.

I didn't think any series could come close to that until Deep Space Nine. A masterpiece of continuity and characters that kept me on the edge of my seat for seven years.

Voyager started off great but cooled off very quickly. The character of the EMH was always fun and there were always two good reasons to watch Seven and her "Borg implants."

Enterprise did the opposite. It started off cool and then took off in its final two seasons. I always liked the characters but early on, they didn't seem to have anything interesting to do.

Trek Animated was always interesting to me because I heard new phrases and dialogue from Classic Trek. I've watched it now and then, and I still enjoy most of the episodes.

Least and last is Next Gen. It degenerated into the "funny forehead" of the week with a cold, distant captain who was transformed into a cold and distant Borg. Not much of a stretch there.

And that's it. I also enjoy Trek in comic book form, novels and the occasional audio program.

And that's the truth....

 

[TheGodBen]

I would like to address the awful effects observation you've made. I guess by today's standard they could be considered as awful....but when you realize this show was filmed over 40 years ago on a tight budget.... I think they did a WONDERFUL job with what little they had. You really realize how little it was when you read the behind the scenes info (thier books etc...) the effects have never bothered me except for the strings in catspaw...that's bothered me since I saw it but other than that i'm good. Sorry you didn't like TAS! It's amazing how opinions can differ huh, but that is what makes the world go round....

I didn't mean that the effects were awful in a derogatory way, I'm sorry if it came across that way. I have a great fondness for TOS overall, but a lot of the later Trek series had fantastic special effects which still hold up ten years later, so going from that to the 60s effects on the original show is jarring. It isn't something which should bother fans too much since the real heart of the stories on TOS revolved around the characters, and that is what made it so great.

 

[Cakes488]

I would like to address the awful effects observation you've made. I guess by today's standard they could be considered as awful....but when you realize this show was filmed over 40 years ago on a tight budget.... I think they did a WONDERFUL job with what little they had. You really realize how little it was when you read the behind the scenes info (thier books etc...) the effects have never bothered me except for the strings in catspaw...that's bothered me since I saw it but other than that i'm good. Sorry you didn't like TAS! It's amazing how opinions can differ huh, but that is what makes the world go round....

I didn't mean that the effects were awful in a derogatory way, I'm sorry if it came across that way. I have a great fondness for TOS overall, but a lot of the later Trek series had fantastic special effects which still hold up ten years later, so going from that to the 60s effects on the original show is jarring. It isn't something which should bother fans too much since the real heart of the stories on TOS revolved around the characters, and that is what made it so great.

I'm not bothered! You would really really know if I was....!! You have a right to your opinion and if you did feel they were awful just for awful's sake then so be it because we are all not going to agree....But you can't compare the 60's effects to the 80's effects I mean I get what you are saying but they are (pun intended lol) light years apart. I still think the effects are excellent for what they had to work with and also this special effects field was still in it's infancy phase (wasn't it??) ....my nephew thought they were pretty good too...he wasn't like OMG these are lame aunt cakes....

 

[Mr. B]

Deep Space Nine for the reasons already mentioned here.

 

[TheGodBen]

I'm not bothered! You would really really know if I was....!! You have a right to your opinion and if you did feel they were awful just for awful's sake then so be it because we are all not going to agree....But you can't compare the 60's effects to the 80's effects I mean I get what you are saying but they are (pun intended lol) light years apart. I still think the effects are excellent for what they had to work with and also this special effects field was still in it's infancy phase (wasn't it??) ....my nephew thought they were pretty good too...he wasn't like OMG these are lame aunt cakes....

I know it was a different time and it isn't fair to compare the effects, but when you are used to the effects on a modern Trek series it can be hard to adapt to how basic the effects are on TOS. When you have seen a fleet of 600 Federation ships go up against 1,200 enemy vessels in some of the most amazing special effects ever produced for television, ships whizzing past one another making incredible turns, torpedoes flying all over the place... a grainy shot of the Enterprise slowly banking to the left just isn't going to get your heart pumping. It isn't the fault of the people who worked on TOS, they did an incredible job with what they had and they just couldn't do the sort of things they could do ten years ago.

I'm not sure how much you know about the story of DS9 or if you have seen the battle scenes before, but this is the greatest battle scene in all of Star Trek. There is some mild spoilers, but mainly it is effects footage.

 

[Michael]

the original invention of the parallel Earth

*hust* Miri *hust*

Well, yeah, you're right, of course. What I meant was that Bread was the first produced episode to do something with the concept. Miri only showed a planet that (ridiculously) looked exactly like Earth, probably so that they could justify filming in standing sets and on location. The story didn't really play with historical "what if" scenarios.

Yeah, of course you're right. The notion of parallel developement in Miri was probably just a way to rationalize the set of the city.

But hell, can't I be a smartass once in a while?

 

[Too Much Fun]

My favourite is and will always be "Star Trek: The Next Generation". It used to be just because I hadn't seen the others, but now after seeing most of "Star Trek", "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" and a few episodes of "Voyager" and "Enterprise", I still think it's the best of the bunch. The main reason is consistency. The first two and last two seasons of the series are pretty weak, but I don't believe any other Star Trek series had as amazing a run of consecutive quality episodes as this one did in seasons three, four, and five. Even in those seasons, there was a clunker here and there, but in my opinion the dramatic zeniths of those episodes cannot be equalled in any of the other series, although DS9 does, at times, come close.

I have a lot of respect for "Star Trek" and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine", but I just don't think they have as strong a ratio of good episodes to bad episodes as the Next Generation, and I don't think their characters/casts are quite as appealing or used quite as creatively. In DS9, there are a lot of characters I really don't care for, and in the original "Star Trek", I like all of the "big 7", but I don't think many of them are given the chance to shine that all of the TNG 7 get, which diminishes them, in my eyes, compared to the TNG cast.

Despite all of its brilliant serialized storytelling, fresh plot ideas, and characters that are fascinating and original, DS9 is still a maddeningly irritating show at times, because in every season I've seen (1-5), there's been an unfortunate trend of several very solid, entertaining, and intelligent episodes having their flow disrupted by disappointing filler episodes. Half of them are plots drowning in convoluted, plodding political/technobabble junk, or excessively broad comedy, or centered around characters that are just a drag to be stuck with.

"Star Trek" also suffers from major consistency issues, which is understandable given its messy production history with the constantly changing staff, but its inconsistency is an even worse offender than that of DS9. At least when DS9 is bad, it's just boring. When "Star Trek" is bad, it's so painfully corny that it makes me angry.

I guess what I've said makes me sound really sour on "Star Trek" and "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine", but I want to make it clear that I actually do have a lot of affection for both. I love the characters in "Star Trek" as much, if not more than their TNG counterparts and believe that both shows featured some of the best written and most imaginative television I've ever seen. The bottom line is, I just don't think their highs reach the height of The Next Generation's peaks.

 

[Eddie Roth]

*hust* Miri *hust*

Well, yeah, you're right, of course. What I meant was that Bread was the first produced episode to do something with the concept. Miri only showed a planet that (ridiculously) looked exactly like Earth, probably so that they could justify filming in standing sets and on location. The story didn't really play with historical "what if" scenarios.

Yeah, of course you're right. The notion of parallel developement in Miri was probably just a way to rationalize the set of the city.

But hell, can't I be a smartass once in a while?

Oh my, yes! Good thing I always end up right!
I kid, of course... Disagreement is what sparks discussion, and that's what we're here for, right? I love to put forth opposing views in some of these formus here occasionally, just for the sake of it. Because with Trekkies supposedly being so open to new ideas, it's sometimes deliciously easy to rattle their cages.

 

[Incubus]

Hey I know this is off topic but I was wondering if you guys could help me out. I am doing research about fandom for a film studies course and I know Star Trek has a very devoted fan base to say the least, knowing nothing about Star Trek myself I was wondering if a few of you could tell me a bit about why you are fans it would be much appreciated!

 

[Myasishchev]

Star Trek, more than any other piece of art I can think of, strikes that fine balance between sense and nonsense, good and bad, sublime and base, to both entertain the aesthete and confound the obsessive. And any Trekkie worth his salt is both.

 

[SFRabid]

1. ENT - Narrow margin over DS9 because it started slow and ended great. Other series tend to fade in the last year. I also really like the cast and what they did with Vulcans.

2. DS9- Close to ENT. Would be my favorite but I finally got tired of The Sisko stuff at the end. Plus, I really hated that Dax changed.

3. TOS - I really wish year three was better.

4. TOS - Started slow and has not aged well.

5. VOY - Started slow. Ended bad. Had some ok parts in the middle. Never understood how they could make friends with Q, help him with his son, and not get him to send them home.

 

[Astraea]

Okay, so I got pulled into ST when I was little; I started watching scattered TNG episodes and then got into consistently watching during S1 of DS9/S7 of TNG. (My mom was a casual fan of TNG.) And while some kids get into dinosaurs or Barbie or whatever, I got into Star Trek.

I am, and always have been, a geek. Well-socialized, but geeky nonetheless. Geeky in terms of liking academics, but also geeky in the terms of being drawn towards fantasy, sci-fi, and speculative history, because those genres in particular speak of possibilities.

I like Star Trek in general because it's optimistic and hopeful, but also because it tells good stories. People watch TV or read books, first and foremost, to be entertained. Star Trek is generally entertaining.

DS9 is my favorite because of personal preferences in storytelling (large ensemble cast; many well-developed characters who come in all shades of gray and not merely in wholly good/wholly bad varieties; characters who grow and change over the course of the show, generally with a continuous character development rather than a sudden and inexplicable shift; a tendency towards being dark without becoming hopeless.) There's also the fact that there's a huge Star Trek universe with room for all sorts of different interesting stories. Klingons, Cardassians, Trill, Bajorans, Romulans: everyone's got their own cultures, their own perspectives, and those individual cultures can be extremely interesting (and provide wonderful storytelling possibilities that might not be possible in "real-world" storytelling.)

That's one of the joys of fantasy/SF in general: you can create story possibilities that wouldn't be possible otherwise, and you can create situations that track with real-world dilemmas/situations that turn things on their head; you have opportunities for social commentary without being too on-the-nose, stories that can make you think about different sides of a story.

And, in getting me hooked, DS9's strong women characters definitely had an impact. TNG had Troi and Crusher; Counselor "Captain, I sense danger" did not impress me. Star Wars had one female main character, and I never got interested. Lord of the Rings had almost no women at all (okay, so I loved Eowyn, but also took to pretending certain Fellowship members were female to attain some sort of parity). If the fantasy/SF genre tends to have a downside, it's that women are used more for the sex appeal than for story (Seven's catsuit comes to mind). But DS9 had women who were kicking ass and taking names, and at the age of six/seven, I thought this was great.

But the most important thing is that the best of Trek consistently produces interesting drama in both literature and television. And Star Trek's "devoted fans," are devoted because they're invested in the characters, and in the social community. Star Trek trivia, sports trivia: is remembering obscure facts about a Star Trek character really that much different from remembering obscure trivia about a hockey player's +/- rating for the season? And is some guy dressing up in costume for a convention really all that different from some guy painting his chest and standing shirtless outside in freezing November weather in an open football stadium? Social communities are social communities; fandoms are fandoms. People like talking to people who like the same things they do. Star Trek has enough fans to keep an active fandom alive, and enough quality to hopefully generate new fans.

I think I'm getting to the point where I'm kind of rambling, so I'll stop.

...and completely forgot the immediate point of this reply: I was going to recommend nu-BSG to Cakes488. I've just finished S2.5, and it is awesome. Very dark, very intense, but with excellent storytelling and character development. It manages to surprise on a regular basis. If you end up liking DS9, I'd really recommend nu-BSG. (Granted, I haven't seen S3-4.5 yet, but thus far, the overall quality has been excellent. To me, there are some things that nu-BSG has done that covered the same ground as Voyager, but that kicked butt where Voyager was just kind of "meh." The best comparison I can think of here is "Pegasus" to "Equinox.")

 

[kissthestar]

TOS: sine qua non

 

[Cakes488]

"Star Trek" also suffers from major consistency issues, which is understandable given its messy production history with the constantly changing staff, but its inconsistency is an even worse offender than that of DS9. At least when DS9 is bad, it's just boring. When "Star Trek" is bad, it's so painfully corny that it makes me angry.
quote]

But we would of never noticed these consistency issues had we not spent the last 40 years picking apart every scene.

Star Trek, more than any other piece of art I can think of, strikes that fine balance between sense and nonsense, good and bad, sublime and base, to both entertain the aesthete and confound the obsessive. And any Trekkie worth his salt is both.

Beautifully said Myasishchev....you've moved me to tears (lol)

...and completely forgot the immediate point of this reply: I was going to recommend nu-BSG to Cakes488. I've just finished S2.5, and it is awesome. Very dark, very intense, but with excellent storytelling and character development. It manages to surprise on a regular basis. If you end up liking DS9, I'd really recommend nu-BSG. (Granted, I haven't seen S3-4.5 yet, but thus far, the overall quality has been excellent. To me, there are some things that nu-BSG has done that covered the same ground as Voyager, but that kicked butt where Voyager was just kind of "meh." The best comparison I can think of here is "Pegasus" to "Equinox.")

Thanks for the recommendation! I didn't pay much attention to BSG when it was on but as soon as the series concludes every reviewer and thier mother is saying what an excellent show it was...so I'll add this series to the list even though I have no idea when I could possibly find the time to watch all this.

I'm not bothered! You would really really know if I was....!! You have a right to your opinion and if you did feel they were awful just for awful's sake then so be it because we are all not going to agree....But you can't compare the 60's effects to the 80's effects I mean I get what you are saying but they are (pun intended lol) light years apart. I still think the effects are excellent for what they had to work with and also this special effects field was still in it's infancy phase (wasn't it??) ....my nephew thought they were pretty good too...he wasn't like OMG these are lame aunt cakes....

I know it was a different time and it isn't fair to compare the effects, but when you are used to the effects on a modern Trek series it can be hard to adapt to how basic the effects are on TOS. When you have seen a fleet of 600 Federation ships go up against 1,200 enemy vessels in some of the most amazing special effects ever produced for television, ships whizzing past one another making incredible turns, torpedoes flying all over the place... a grainy shot of the Enterprise slowly banking to the left just isn't going to get your heart pumping. It isn't the fault of the people who worked on TOS, they did an incredible job with what they had and they just couldn't do the sort of things they could do ten years ago.

I'm not sure how much you know about the story of DS9 or if you have seen the battle scenes before, but this is the greatest battle scene in all of Star Trek. There is some mild spoilers, but mainly it is effects footage.

I truly appreciate disagreeing with you but us both being able to see each others points! So refreshing !! But I do see yours...I'll assume you're younger than me and male and putting myself in your position I guess i would be unimpressed with Tos' effects after being raised on all the newer effects.....I'm not sure if being female has anything to do with it but I just don't care about the special effects that much...that has little to no bearing on if I would like it a movie or series etc....

 

[TheGodBen]

I truly appreciate disagreeing with you but us both being able to see each others points! So refreshing !! But I do see yours...I'll assume you're younger than me and male and putting myself in your position I guess i would be unimpressed with Tos' effects after being raised on all the newer effects.....I'm not sure if being female has anything to do with it but I just don't care about the special effects that much...that has little to no bearing on if I would like it a movie or series etc....

Well I am male, and I don't wish to presume your age but since the average age for a human is roughly 28 it is statistically more likely that I am younger than you.

The special effects on TOS don't really bother me since it is the story which matters for the most part. That and the mini-skirts.

 

[Cakes488]

I truly appreciate disagreeing with you but us both being able to see each others points! So refreshing !! But I do see yours...I'll assume you're younger than me and male and putting myself in your position I guess i would be unimpressed with Tos' effects after being raised on all the newer effects.....I'm not sure if being female has anything to do with it but I just don't care about the special effects that much...that has little to no bearing on if I would like it a movie or series etc....

Well I am male, and I don't wish to presume your age but since the average age for a human is roughly 28 it is statistically more likely that I am younger than you.

The special effects on TOS don't really bother me since it is the story which matters for the most part. That and the mini-skirts.

Yes you are my dear but at least not THAT much younger...I'm 37....you'll be there quicker than you know it! Well it looks like you have a good head on your shoulders appreciating TOS for the great storylines and yeah those mini-skirts sure don't hurt your eyes I'm sure. So you guys (and lesbians) have all the gorgeous women of Trek and us lucky ladies (and gay men) have the sexy ass crew to view. You bi-sexuals out there get to enjoy everything....I digress.