In Depth DS9 Review
- Thread starter USS Excelsior
- Start date
Much thanks for posting this, USS Excelsior. An interesting analysis, even if I can't agree with a lot of it
For example:
* Since when did Ziyal become a 'main character', exactly? She was a relatively minor recurring character. I was shocked, but not surprised, when she died - her usefulness in humanising Dukat was essentially spent. I was actually much more surprised when they killed Gowron. My jaw dropped. He'd been there since, like, forever (to be exact, TNG's third season: "Reunion")!
* They decided to make Bashir a changeling in "In Purgatory's Fire", so it's not as pre-planned as the reviewer implies... and, as Sisko was promoted to Commander basically (according to the Companion, IIRC) so he's not deprecatingly referred to as not being a captain, unlike Kirk Picard and Janeway, it's not as significant as he implies. (Plus he kind of blows a hole in his argument by using a picture of Captain Spock. Heh...)
* Plenty of individual DS9 scenes are IMHO memorable and have stuck with me. The root beer conversation in "The Way of the Warrior", for example.
* Season two is persisently underrated. It was better than season three. I'd also say season seven was better than season three. So there.
For example:
* Since when did Ziyal become a 'main character', exactly? She was a relatively minor recurring character. I was shocked, but not surprised, when she died - her usefulness in humanising Dukat was essentially spent. I was actually much more surprised when they killed Gowron. My jaw dropped. He'd been there since, like, forever (to be exact, TNG's third season: "Reunion")!
* They decided to make Bashir a changeling in "In Purgatory's Fire", so it's not as pre-planned as the reviewer implies... and, as Sisko was promoted to Commander basically (according to the Companion, IIRC) so he's not deprecatingly referred to as not being a captain, unlike Kirk Picard and Janeway, it's not as significant as he implies. (Plus he kind of blows a hole in his argument by using a picture of Captain Spock. Heh...)
* Plenty of individual DS9 scenes are IMHO memorable and have stuck with me. The root beer conversation in "The Way of the Warrior", for example.
* Season two is persisently underrated. It was better than season three. I'd also say season seven was better than season three. So there.
He should have his memory checked. Or maybe he has memorised TNG and TOS so much better because he saw those episodes in a hundred reruns over the years?
But oddly, he is describing what I often experience when watching BSG. But DS9? Not for me, anyway.
But oddly, he is describing what I often experience when watching BSG. But DS9? Not for me, anyway.
Part 2 was, well, 
I think every die-hard Niner here could name a few dozen faults they have with DS9, and I think almost nobody would list any of the flaws he seemed to find. They were utterly mind-boggling.
I bet when he reviews Enterprise he'll claim that Mayweather overshadowed Trip and that there weren't enough time travel stories.
I think every die-hard Niner here could name a few dozen faults they have with DS9, and I think almost nobody would list any of the flaws he seemed to find. They were utterly mind-boggling.
I bet when he reviews Enterprise he'll claim that Mayweather overshadowed Trip and that there weren't enough time travel stories.
That argument was actually even more humorously flawed. He said we could never imagine a Lieutenant Commander Spock. One small flaw there. Spock WAS a lieutenant commander during the early TOS episodes.
His Enterprise review didn't even dignify that show by mentioning it's name out loud let alone talk about it which gives away his stance on that show.
If the reviewer had not noticed, each of the modern era Treks tend to focus their allegory on specific topics. TNG's focus was Science and paid particular attention to the Physics (thus all the anomalies, time travel, quantum stuff). DS9's allegory tales tend to be revolve around Societies and Communities at large, covering topics such as domestic and international politics, religion and war.
If all the reviewer learn from DS9 was that "founders are bad, the Federation kicks ass, and thank good for the Romulans and Dukat really can go crazier", I kindly suggest that the reviewer re-watch DS9 again with a new pair of eyes, because I some of the things I learned was that "war is always a loss even for the winning side, keep an open mind on all religions as they can provide a different perspective and that can be a good thing (IDIC), beliefs are strong motivators"
If all the reviewer learn from DS9 was that "founders are bad, the Federation kicks ass, and thank good for the Romulans and Dukat really can go crazier", I kindly suggest that the reviewer re-watch DS9 again with a new pair of eyes, because I some of the things I learned was that "war is always a loss even for the winning side, keep an open mind on all religions as they can provide a different perspective and that can be a good thing (IDIC), beliefs are strong motivators"
Actually, if you want to see where he's got absolutely no idea what he's talking about, try his analysis of the decline of television.
Which boils down to this: TV today sucks far more than TV did a decade ago, and the best programs around today are on YouTube, namely Ask A Ninja and The Angry Video Game Nerd.
A decade ago, TV didn't have Dexter. Now it does. Case dismissed.
This is more a rant of vengful nostalgia than a coherent critique, especially as he limits his attack on TV to decaying franchises - The Simpsons and Star Trek. It's like all that great HBO/Showtime stuff isn't happening.
And seriously... The Angry Video Game Nerd?
I've come to the conclusion that confusedmatthew is very good at doing one thing: Critiquing implausible plot holes in a film. When it comes to analysing why a show is good or bad he's on a little shakier ground, and some of the things he says there really defy belief.
Also, his straightforward parodies are dreadful. In conclusion: confusedmatthew should stick to his 'The Crappy Ending' reviews.
Strongly, strongly disagree with him saying DS9 Season 7 was the worst of the series, and worse than any Season of Voyager.
Season 7 is easily one of the best of DS9, possibly surpassed a tiny bit by Season 6. But really, no other Season of DS9 or any Trek show can compete at all with either Season 6 or Season 7 of DS9.
Also disagree with him being fascinated by the the death of Ziyal and saying she's a main character. She had like 3 different actors playing her; obviously they didn't care about her character all that much. And him being fascinated by the Bashir changeling, which was an ad hoc villain (to use his phrasing describing Voy's ad hoc villains) that clearly doesn't fit in properly with the other episodes of DS9 because they simply made it up on the spot.
I do strongly agree with how he doesn't like Dax.
Strongly disagree with all of his part II of the review. My in-depth response of why DS9 is Star Trek is in this thread.
I find the comments that DS9 characters have no substance or memorable scenes and does not explore humanity to be absolutely ridiculous. DS9's characters are by far the most fleshed-out out of any Trek show, and as such, explore humanity better than any Trek show. There are tons of timeless characters and scenes in DS9, I have no clue why the reviewer can't remember any of them.
Season 7 is easily one of the best of DS9, possibly surpassed a tiny bit by Season 6. But really, no other Season of DS9 or any Trek show can compete at all with either Season 6 or Season 7 of DS9.
Also disagree with him being fascinated by the the death of Ziyal and saying she's a main character. She had like 3 different actors playing her; obviously they didn't care about her character all that much.
And him being fascinated by the Bashir changeling, which was an ad hoc villain (to use his phrasing describing Voy's ad hoc villains) that clearly doesn't fit in properly with the other episodes of DS9 because they simply made it up on the spot.I do strongly agree with how he doesn't like Dax.
Strongly disagree with all of his part II of the review. My in-depth response of why DS9 is Star Trek is in this thread.
I find the comments that DS9 characters have no substance or memorable scenes and does not explore humanity to be absolutely ridiculous. DS9's characters are by far the most fleshed-out out of any Trek show, and as such, explore humanity better than any Trek show. There are tons of timeless characters and scenes in DS9, I have no clue why the reviewer can't remember any of them.
His points about rank were indeed hilarious. As mentioned above, who'd have ever thought there could be a Lt Commander Spock. Oddly enough, it came off as a positive that Sisko was promoted, making the series seem real with consequences. Did he ever watch any of the movies, wonders ex-Admiral Kirk.
His overall point of view has some merit while I disagree with it. I can understand him not thinking the series was really Star Trek. It took me until this year to actually watch the entire series for similar reasons. (this was good and bad... bad that I missed it earlier, good that I saw it all on DVD and cliffhangers became movies *grin*).
His point on memory after watching the whole series, leaves me aghast! Ask me if I remember lines, and I'll spit out "Find him and KILL him!" or "I really, really, don't hate you."
Funny, I came here after watching the series and find that many thought seasons 1 & 2 were bad in varying degrees. The reviewer obviously hated Voyager and thought season 7 was worse than that whole series. Here's my question... what's wrong with me in that I liked the WHOLE series? (except for the occasionaly "stinker episode" that all series have).
His overall point of view has some merit while I disagree with it. I can understand him not thinking the series was really Star Trek. It took me until this year to actually watch the entire series for similar reasons. (this was good and bad... bad that I missed it earlier, good that I saw it all on DVD and cliffhangers became movies *grin*).
His point on memory after watching the whole series, leaves me aghast! Ask me if I remember lines, and I'll spit out "Find him and KILL him!" or "I really, really, don't hate you."
Funny, I came here after watching the series and find that many thought seasons 1 & 2 were bad in varying degrees. The reviewer obviously hated Voyager and thought season 7 was worse than that whole series. Here's my question... what's wrong with me in that I liked the WHOLE series? (except for the occasionaly "stinker episode" that all series have).
Em, the link's lost.
Also, I disagree with these "reviews", largely.
However, I completely agree with his take on GENERATIONS. Spot on. Check it out.
You and I both.
I second that!
Huh, he gave a positive review to Nemesis and prefers it to First Contact. I think that might give a clue to how his thinking differs from many of the Niners in this forum.
I saw this a couple of months ago. He lost me when he dismissed early great DS9 such as season two. And then he makes ridiculous comments in the end about DS9 eps not being memorable like those of Classic Trek. I'll put the top ten or top twenty DS9 eps against the top ten or twenty of TOS anyday. In my opinion the DS9 eps are so more mature and well thought out that they would slaughter the TOS shows. But I guess its all subjective right?
Most importantly DS9 did not have the opportunity to have 20 years of being discovered (rediscovered) by an American public when TV channels were small in numbers, VCRs were not in most people homes, DVD collections weren't around, vidoe games were extremely primitive, IPods didn't exist, the home computer was an unheard of concept and the internet wasn't around. In other words DS9 had much more competition during its original run and during its years being rebroadcast as repeats. The viewer/consumer has hundreds of more options to entertain themselves including several other Trek shows (not to mention over a hundred different sci-fi shows since TOS went off the air). Viewers have too any options to, as a whole, discover another Trek show like DS9 which they did not catch on TV the first time around. TOS, during its rebroadcast had the sci fi audience to itself. In fact it even had a stranglehold on non-sci fans because the alternatives on TV (back when Americans were essntially limited to five or seven TV channels) were few. As good as TOS was if it had to capture the American attention span as modern days show do now no way would it have been as huge a success (post-cancellation) as it became. People have a lot more options now but back in the TOS days on syndicated TV (70s and early 80s), TOS filled a need for programming and large chunks of the American audience were able to get acquainted with the show and see episodes again and again and again and again. Particularly kids who came home from school and had TOs on their TV every day, one of the few shows that would regularly catch their attention because it had the "cool stuff" that kids and young adults are drawn too. Because of this unique period of time TOS was able to rise from the ashes and become the cultural icon that it is today. And repeated viewings of its episodes I would argue made TOS more readily recalled to the minds of the casual fan than DS9. That's fine. DS9 will never reach those heights in terms of audience recognition and cult status. But that does not mean DS9 was an inferior show with less memorable episodes. The new Battlestar Galactica and Lost are both better written shows than TOS but you can bet both will never reach TOS' icon status either. Its a different time now with a more fractured audience. Its a new era. But I challenege anyone with an open mind who isn't too familiar with any of the Trek shows to watch both TOS and DS9 with an open mind and tell me that DS9 isn't at TOS' level in terms of quality.
Most importantly DS9 did not have the opportunity to have 20 years of being discovered (rediscovered) by an American public when TV channels were small in numbers, VCRs were not in most people homes, DVD collections weren't around, vidoe games were extremely primitive, IPods didn't exist, the home computer was an unheard of concept and the internet wasn't around. In other words DS9 had much more competition during its original run and during its years being rebroadcast as repeats. The viewer/consumer has hundreds of more options to entertain themselves including several other Trek shows (not to mention over a hundred different sci-fi shows since TOS went off the air). Viewers have too any options to, as a whole, discover another Trek show like DS9 which they did not catch on TV the first time around. TOS, during its rebroadcast had the sci fi audience to itself. In fact it even had a stranglehold on non-sci fans because the alternatives on TV (back when Americans were essntially limited to five or seven TV channels) were few. As good as TOS was if it had to capture the American attention span as modern days show do now no way would it have been as huge a success (post-cancellation) as it became. People have a lot more options now but back in the TOS days on syndicated TV (70s and early 80s), TOS filled a need for programming and large chunks of the American audience were able to get acquainted with the show and see episodes again and again and again and again. Particularly kids who came home from school and had TOs on their TV every day, one of the few shows that would regularly catch their attention because it had the "cool stuff" that kids and young adults are drawn too. Because of this unique period of time TOS was able to rise from the ashes and become the cultural icon that it is today. And repeated viewings of its episodes I would argue made TOS more readily recalled to the minds of the casual fan than DS9. That's fine. DS9 will never reach those heights in terms of audience recognition and cult status. But that does not mean DS9 was an inferior show with less memorable episodes. The new Battlestar Galactica and Lost are both better written shows than TOS but you can bet both will never reach TOS' icon status either. Its a different time now with a more fractured audience. Its a new era. But I challenege anyone with an open mind who isn't too familiar with any of the Trek shows to watch both TOS and DS9 with an open mind and tell me that DS9 isn't at TOS' level in terms of quality.
That's another thing that had me scrathing my head. I think First Contact is overrated but its a masterpiece when compared to Nemesis.
I pretty much would tend to agree with the overall idea that the reviewer is presenting.
DS9 isn't at TOS' level in terms of quality.
DS9 isn't at TOS' level in terms of quality.
Similar threads
- Locked
