I liked TNG...but

[RobertScorpio]

But the most rewarding part of DS9 that none of the other TREK shows, including TOS, really had was the evolution of the characters...

Agreed. Continuity & Character Development. These are what I look for in a series, and DS9 had them in spades. Next Gen was ok, but DS9 is where Trek took off for me. It's funny because I remember this special that aired right around the finale of Next Gen called "Journey's End" (not to be confused with the actual episode of the same title) and there were interviews with the creative peeps behind Next Gen, and Rick Berman was trying to describe how we'd seen the characters 'grow' over the years and the examples of this were almost comical, with him pointing out that when the series started LaForge was one of the youngest members of the crew (which obviously didn't change) and that Riker had grown a beard. lol. That was the character developement on Next Gen. lol On DS9, there was more character development for the 30 odd recurring characters than for the main characters of all the other Treks combined, which made me care about DS9's characters more; they felt real. And at the end of DS9 we had an actual ending with crew members going their separate ways. It was just the best possible Trek.

Well said...When a show has that kind of growth, IMO, it helps you see them as more than just characters. When they grow, and you are going through changes in your own life, its as if you share the experience of life. Yeah, I know, we shouldn't see these shows as counterparts to our own live...but you know what? We do. That is why an entire generation grew up on shows lik LITTLE HOUSE or COSBY or whatever..because they grew up with those shows and watched these characters grow up too..

TNG is a great show. But that kind of story telling, to me, went away back in the 80s. I don't think the makers of TNG, especially the early two seasons, had really any clue as to how evolved writing had become. GR, great producer, and supposed champion of new ideas, IMO, was stuck in 1970s motif. Rick Berman (who will soon be on 24 I guess) for all his problems did modernize the feel of Star Trek when he brought Piller and RDM, and the other writers as well, aboard.

DS9 took that baton and ran with it. It may have started off slow like Forest Gump, but when it hit its stride, it was RUNNING!!!

Rob

 

[Navaros]

I agree that DS9 is a much better show than TNG and TNG has no character development whatsoever.

I don't like TNG though. I don't see any redeeming qualities of TNG, which DS9 has in spades. Ie: character development, story development, conflict, non-generic non-talking-head characters, interesting non-generic conversations, great acting, great secondary characters, adventure etc. etc.

 

[TS-1838-SWATH]

TNG got rid of the campy-ness and made people look at Star Trek differently.
Picard's leadership style was examined it a book Make It So: Leadership Lessons from Star Trek the Next Generation.

It Expaned the Fan Base
It Did Play it safe many times

DS9 was Known for breaking the Rules and sometimes playing it safe i.e. Second Skin.
It developed its non leads better than the other treks
It did arcs

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I agree that DS9 is a much better show than TNG and TNG has no character development whatsoever.

I don't like TNG though. I don't see any redeeming qualities of TNG, which DS9 has in spades. Ie: character development, story development, conflict, non-generic non-talking-head characters, interesting non-generic conversations, great acting, great secondary characters, adventure etc. etc.

I'm a fan of both shows and I think you're dead wrong about TNG not having character development. While the characters didn't go through as many life-altering changes as the characters on DS9, they were not the same people. Picard was a stiff, cold commanding officer when he began. By the end, he'd softened up quite a bit and was actually very close to his command staff. Data grew in his confidence and abilities. Geordi went from flying the ship to becoming an excellent engineer. Worf got a lot of development, too. Troi and Crusher didn't get quite as much attention--they tended to get stuck with crappy romance episodes--but there were at least attempts. Riker went from a green commander to a veteran with the chops to command his own ship.

TNG was and still is a good show on its own merits. It's just not the same kind of show as DS9.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I agree that DS9 is a much better show than TNG and TNG has no character development whatsoever.

I don't like TNG though. I don't see any redeeming qualities of TNG, which DS9 has in spades. Ie: character development, story development, conflict, non-generic non-talking-head characters, interesting non-generic conversations, great acting, great secondary characters, adventure etc. etc.

I'm a fan of both shows and I think you're dead wrong about TNG not having character development. While the characters didn't go through as many life-altering changes as the characters on DS9, they were not the same people. Picard was a stiff, cold commanding officer when he began. By the end, he'd softened up quite a bit and was actually very close to his command staff. Data grew in his confidence and abilities. Geordi went from flying the ship to becoming an excellent engineer. Worf got a lot of development, too. Troi and Crusher didn't get quite as much attention--they tended to get stuck with crappy romance episodes--but there were at least attempts. Riker went from a green commander to a veteran with the chops to command his own ship.

TNG was and still is a good show on its own merits. It's just not the same kind of show as DS9.

I don't see the character growth that you see in picard at all. From what I can tell? He was a prick on Stargazer, then became captain, and made good friends on that ship. Then...he comes to the "D" and is a prick again. Then, over time, he opens up...though just a little. Somehow I think if he had to go be with an entirely new crew he'd be a prick at the start again....the only reason Picard was such a great character was because of Patrick. Other than that...not much there, IMO.

Geordi didn't grow as a character..he just changed jobs...big deal. Still have no idea what makes that guy tick...

The only two characters that grew on that show were Data and Worf, and maybe Riker..thats it. And thats the way the show was written..

Rob

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I agree that DS9 is a much better show than TNG and TNG has no character development whatsoever.

I don't like TNG though. I don't see any redeeming qualities of TNG, which DS9 has in spades. Ie: character development, story development, conflict, non-generic non-talking-head characters, interesting non-generic conversations, great acting, great secondary characters, adventure etc. etc.

I'm a fan of both shows and I think you're dead wrong about TNG not having character development. While the characters didn't go through as many life-altering changes as the characters on DS9, they were not the same people. Picard was a stiff, cold commanding officer when he began. By the end, he'd softened up quite a bit and was actually very close to his command staff. Data grew in his confidence and abilities. Geordi went from flying the ship to becoming an excellent engineer. Worf got a lot of development, too. Troi and Crusher didn't get quite as much attention--they tended to get stuck with crappy romance episodes--but there were at least attempts. Riker went from a green commander to a veteran with the chops to command his own ship.

TNG was and still is a good show on its own merits. It's just not the same kind of show as DS9.

I don't see the character growth that you see in picard at all. From what I can tell? He was a prick on Stargazer, then became captain, and made good friends on that ship. Then...he comes to the "D" and is a prick again. Then, over time, he opens up...though just a little. Somehow I think if he had to go be with an entirely new crew he'd be a prick at the start again....the only reason Picard was such a great character was because of Patrick. Other than that...not much there, IMO.

Geordi didn't grow as a character..he just changed jobs...big deal. Still have no idea what makes that guy tick...

The only two characters that grew on that show were Data and Worf, and maybe Riker..thats it. And thats the way the show was written..

Rob

"Some" character development is still more than "no" character development.

 

[RobertScorpio]

I'm a fan of both shows and I think you're dead wrong about TNG not having character development. While the characters didn't go through as many life-altering changes as the characters on DS9, they were not the same people. Picard was a stiff, cold commanding officer when he began. By the end, he'd softened up quite a bit and was actually very close to his command staff. Data grew in his confidence and abilities. Geordi went from flying the ship to becoming an excellent engineer. Worf got a lot of development, too. Troi and Crusher didn't get quite as much attention--they tended to get stuck with crappy romance episodes--but there were at least attempts. Riker went from a green commander to a veteran with the chops to command his own ship.

TNG was and still is a good show on its own merits. It's just not the same kind of show as DS9.

I don't see the character growth that you see in picard at all. From what I can tell? He was a prick on Stargazer, then became captain, and made good friends on that ship. Then...he comes to the "D" and is a prick again. Then, over time, he opens up...though just a little. Somehow I think if he had to go be with an entirely new crew he'd be a prick at the start again....the only reason Picard was such a great character was because of Patrick. Other than that...not much there, IMO.

Geordi didn't grow as a character..he just changed jobs...big deal. Still have no idea what makes that guy tick...

The only two characters that grew on that show were Data and Worf, and maybe Riker..thats it. And thats the way the show was written..

Rob

"Some" character development is still more than "no" character development.

True..

Rob

 

[Myasishchev]

Geordi didn't grow as a character..he just changed jobs...big deal. Still have no idea what makes that guy tick...

We don't? I thought he ran on pure desperation.

 

[RobertScorpio]

Geordi didn't grow as a character..he just changed jobs...big deal. Still have no idea what makes that guy tick...

We don't? I thought he ran on pure desperation.

Which we pretty much figured out in the third season...Levar Burton was the only actor from that show who I actually knew of before TNG started...and he was wasted in that role..IMO

Rob

 

[adg]

It was just a great romp of a show. I loved it (meaning DS9).

 

[plague]

It's funny because I remember this special that aired right around the finale of Next Gen called "Journey's End" ... and Rick Berman was trying to describe how we'd seen the characters 'grow' over the years and the examples of this were almost comical, with him pointing out that ... Riker had grown a beard.

Riker's character development, a beard.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

TNG is a great show. But that kind of story telling, to me, went away back in the 80s. I don't think the makers of TNG, especially the early two seasons, had really any clue as to how evolved writing had become. GR, great producer, and supposed champion of new ideas, IMO, was stuck in 1970s motif.

Strange that the ratings of non-reality programming and America as a whole with their CSI etc fixation would disagree with this assessment. I would argue that still, to this day, TNG style "watch it any order and you're fine (for the most part)" storytelling is just as popular, if not more so now. The ratings decline of shows with heavy arcs keep on proving this. Despite the often times better story possibilities.

 

[RobertScorpio]

TNG is a great show. But that kind of story telling, to me, went away back in the 80s. I don't think the makers of TNG, especially the early two seasons, had really any clue as to how evolved writing had become. GR, great producer, and supposed champion of new ideas, IMO, was stuck in 1970s motif.

Strange that the ratings of non-reality programming and America as a whole with their CSI etc fixation would disagree with this assessment. I would argue that still, to this day, TNG style "watch it any order and you're fine (for the most part)" storytelling is just as popular, if not more so now. The ratings decline of shows with heavy arcs keep on proving this. Despite the often times better story possibilities.

You have a good point. But I watch CSI. And CSI does indeed have continuity all over the place. They always bring up stuff they did in the past. They may be 'one' episode stories...but they draw upon their past all the time. TNG did it sometimes, but not alot, and Berman wanted it that way, and even more so on Voyager/Ent. And those two shows, and especially Enterprise, were ratings repellers.

And another big point? The writing on some of those later treks was just awful. Something drove TREK fans away, and I think it all comes down to the quality of the writing and the lack of any real growth in how they told stories...CSI is not the same show it was when it started. It got better...Enterprise took 3.5 years to get better and by then..it was too late.

Rob

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

^^
Yeah, very much agreed, sort of a too little too late sort of thing by the end of Enterprise.

I have to admit, I don't watch any of the CSI's, but you say they've changed for the better. I know they've been going a LOOONG time now as well. Did that take more than 3 years? I know for me, TNG took 3 years before it got great. And same with DS9, I didn't really sit up and take notice of the show (even though I watched every episode) until season 4.

Maybe people and networks can't afford to be as patient as they used to be? I don't know. Just thinking "out loud" I guess.

 

[DWF]

TNG is a great show. But that kind of story telling, to me, went away back in the 80s. I don't think the makers of TNG, especially the early two seasons, had really any clue as to how evolved writing had become. GR, great producer, and supposed champion of new ideas, IMO, was stuck in 1970s motif.

Strange that the ratings of non-reality programming and America as a whole with their CSI etc fixation would disagree with this assessment. I would argue that still, to this day, TNG style "watch it any order and you're fine (for the most part)" storytelling is just as popular, if not more so now. The ratings decline of shows with heavy arcs keep on proving this. Despite the often times better story possibilities.

You have a good point. But I watch CSI. And CSI does indeed have continuity all over the place. They always bring up stuff they did in the past. They may be 'one' episode stories...but they draw upon their past all the time. TNG did it sometimes, but not alot, and Berman wanted it that way, and even more so on Voyager/Ent. And those two shows, and especially Enterprise, were ratings repellers.

And another big point? The writing on some of those later treks was just awful. Something drove TREK fans away, and I think it all comes down to the quality of the writing and the lack of any real growth in how they told stories...CSI is not the same show it was when it started. It got better...Enterprise took 3.5 years to get better and by then..it was too late.

Rob

DS9 drove people away as well and Enterprise's ratings were higher for the their first two years than it was for their last two. Only TNG had more viewers when it left the air then it had when it started.

http://www.geocities.com/hblur/cyrus/trekratings.html

 

[Thor Damar]

Was Deep space Nine ever popular with the general public or is it a series that has a hardliner 'niner' fanbase?

 

[PKTrekGirl]

TNG is a great show. But that kind of story telling, to me, went away back in the 80s. I don't think the makers of TNG, especially the early two seasons, had really any clue as to how evolved writing had become. GR, great producer, and supposed champion of new ideas, IMO, was stuck in 1970s motif.

Strange that the ratings of non-reality programming and America as a whole with their CSI etc fixation would disagree with this assessment. I would argue that still, to this day, TNG style "watch it any order and you're fine (for the most part)" storytelling is just as popular, if not more so now. The ratings decline of shows with heavy arcs keep on proving this. Despite the often times better story possibilities.

You have a good point. But I watch CSI. And CSI does indeed have continuity all over the place. They always bring up stuff they did in the past. They may be 'one' episode stories...but they draw upon their past all the time. TNG did it sometimes, but not alot, and Berman wanted it that way, and even more so on Voyager/Ent. And those two shows, and especially Enterprise, were ratings repellers.

See, I see TNG being alot like the CSI sorts of shows. You don't need to watch the entire series to jump in during season 7 and understand 98% of what's going on.

I know those shows have their place, and that most of the American public has a very limited attention span and so that sort of show and reality shows and the like appeal. But my favorite shows have ALWAYS been the arc based shows that show real character growth and more complex storylines - DS9, Babylon 5, Buffy, LOST. Even with The X-Files, my favorite part was the consipracy storyline.

Arc-based shows require a time commitment. I mean, good luck understanding ANYTHING that is going on during season 5 of LOST unless you've watched this show from the beginning. But the payoff is definitely there for those who hang in.

Changing jobs or getting a promotion is NOT character growth. And frankly, I didn't see that much character growth on TNG at all, except with Data, and with him, they spent so MUCH time on one phase of his character growth (to become more human) that it quickly got to be WAY too much of a good thing and frankly, ruined that sort of storyline for every subsequent similarly situated character in Trek (Seven of Nine, T'Pol, as two examples).

No...DS9 and TNG are in completely different categories when it comes to character development. I mean, let's face it - it is difficult to get real character development and growth with that whole 'alien of the week' format. I think one of the best things that DS9 did was develop bad guys of various types who stuck around for the entire series (or large chunks of it, anyway) and offered growth opportunities for our heroes. Dukat, Winn, Damar, The Female Founder, Sloan, Eddington, Brunt... They all offered multiple opportunities for our heroes to grow and change - and demonstrate that change through their dealings with these guys.

The arc-based format and the huge amount of character growth and development - even among the secondary characters - is what sets DS9 apart from the rest. I mean, think about it - DS9 recurring characters such as Garak and Damar got more development and growth than most primary characters in every other Trek show outside of DS9.