It is if Abrams can think of an excuse to make it explode within the first ten minutes.
Most successful/least successful show
- Thread starter Sparkle Fabulosa
- Start date
It is if Abrams can think of an excuse to make it explode within the first ten minutes.
They could make a station work for popcorn movies. Just add small, mobile fighters to the mix and make a couple really good set pieces for combat scenes.
They couldn't make the politics of DS9 work for a popcorn movie though. Or the Bajorans. I suppose they could make something sensational out of a p'agh wraith story but they wouldn't want to explain the backstory.
I'd rather have seen a short miniseries than a movie.
DS9 has a big niche following and appeals to new viewers more than the other series but TOS is clearly the most generally iconic series.
They couldn't make the politics of DS9 work for a popcorn movie though. Or the Bajorans. I suppose they could make something sensational out of a p'agh wraith story but they wouldn't want to explain the backstory.
I'd rather have seen a short miniseries than a movie.
DS9 has a big niche following and appeals to new viewers more than the other series but TOS is clearly the most generally iconic series.
It's actually pretty easy - just remake Zulu in space.
Yeah, TOS became succesfull thanks to re-runs...
TNG was reasonably succesfull right away due to the TOS legacy...
Completely disagree. It might be the majority view that "oh, the series didn't become good until season 3" but it's not one I subscribe to - it also conveniently forgets that season 5 and 7 were pretty ropey in parts, and - more criminally - forgets some of the brilliance and genuine risk-taking of those first two seasons (before, arguably, it settled into a "defined format". Even the cast agree with this).
Season 1 had some great moments, and Season 2 is one of my fave Trek seasons overall.
As for the original question, TOS/TNG depending on what metrics you use, are easily the most popular.
While I agree, the first two seasons of TNG are unfairly criticized, I got to say the second season is still pretty bad. Yes, it has some excellent episodes scattered within, but overall it was a rather disappointing season. Not necessarily anyone's fault, the show was just coming out of a writer's strike and several scripts were just re-worked Phase II stories as a result.
And while I agree the first season isn't as bad as everyone makes it out to be, out of the first three seasons, the third really is the best, which is where I think the "it didn't get good until the third season" myth comes from.
The fourth was probably my least favourite. That year really was "bland and formulaic" moreso than any other TNG season, IMO. The fifth is maybe just as formulaic, but the stories they were telling more interesting stories. With seasons 6 and 7 they were more ambitious and trying new things again, though with admittedly mixed results.
Might want to go back and review the previous 10 films. There's lots of early explosions in them.
Any proof of this?
In fact, TUC's opening scene is an explosion.
I disagree that TNG did more risk taking at the beginning. I agree it's over-hated, now that I've been watching through it again. But it was very much staying in TOS's shadow in the first season and was more comfortable being campy. Also in the first two seasons the offship sets look pretty awful other than EaF. Always solid color background, obviously fake scenery and dry ice.
The logic of the storytelling also felt much more contrived than later in the series. They were trying to tell their stories through the lens of space heroism (Which did not work as well for Picard and Riker as it did with Kirk), instead of trying to be character driven.
@BillJ
I can't give you any statistics or scientific studies on the matter, but every single person I've talked to who watched DS9 for the first time after Enterprise ended, previously never having been into Star Trek, said they love it, and are lukewarm on the other series.
The logic of the storytelling also felt much more contrived than later in the series. They were trying to tell their stories through the lens of space heroism (Which did not work as well for Picard and Riker as it did with Kirk), instead of trying to be character driven.
@BillJ
I can't give you any statistics or scientific studies on the matter, but every single person I've talked to who watched DS9 for the first time after Enterprise ended, previously never having been into Star Trek, said they love it, and are lukewarm on the other series.
I tend to think that the fact it airs nowhere here in the States means, at least here, that the series isn't very well regarded outside its hardcore fanbase. Plus, I'd doubt too many people are introduced to it brand new on a regular basis. Which really kills its opportunity for growth.
In the long run, Deep Space Nine will be a footnote in TV history as the spinoff of a spinoff. Fair or not.
I like DS9, but if we are going by anecdotal evidence here... at the time when VOY and DS9 were on the air, almost everybody I knew watched VOY, but only the most hardcore fans paid any attention at all to DS9.
It might get a different reaction today in 2015, since the story arc format is similar to everything being broadcast now.
Kor
It might get a different reaction today in 2015, since the story arc format is similar to everything being broadcast now.
Kor
^ So why was Voyager more popular than DS9? I would have thought it the other way around simply because Voyager was set on another starship and DS9 was something different, being set on a space station.
I guess it was because early DS9 was pretty dull and once you lose someone, it's rare that they come back.
I see. I'm almost finished season 1 and my enthusiasm for season 2 is not there but I still want to continue. Although if Quark wasn't a part of the show I doubt I would.
Yes, I remember at the time DS9 aired, there was a sense among casual viewers that it was "boring" in the first couple seasons. The space station setting was derided as, "to boldly go NOWHERE."
DS9 really picked up later on. But then there were lots of story arcs, so if you jumped in and started watching in the middle of an arc, then you were kind of lost about what was happening, and might be inclined to give up on the show.
I like the Dominion War storyline in the later seasons. Sure, some people complained that "Star Trek isn't about war." But sadly, war has been a part of the human condition for a long time. And Trek is all about exploring the human condition! As peaceful as the Federation may be, how do they react to the threat of aggressive outside powers that don't share their ideals? And what does all this teach us about ourselves and our society? IMO, episodes like "In the Pale Moonlight" and "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" are some of the finest Trek ever produced, for those reasons.
Kor
DS9 really picked up later on. But then there were lots of story arcs, so if you jumped in and started watching in the middle of an arc, then you were kind of lost about what was happening, and might be inclined to give up on the show.
I like the Dominion War storyline in the later seasons. Sure, some people complained that "Star Trek isn't about war." But sadly, war has been a part of the human condition for a long time. And Trek is all about exploring the human condition! As peaceful as the Federation may be, how do they react to the threat of aggressive outside powers that don't share their ideals? And what does all this teach us about ourselves and our society? IMO, episodes like "In the Pale Moonlight" and "Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges" are some of the finest Trek ever produced, for those reasons.
Kor
Last edited:
I remember when DS9 was in production and we were watching it as it aired, many of my Star Trek-liking friends referred to it as "Third World Star Trek", ostensibly because of its look and feel, and the diversity and "difference" it had compared to other iterations of Star Trek. I tuned in to see "Hawk" from "Spencer For Hire" (Avery), and Clayton Runnymede Endicott III from "Benson" (Rene Auberjonois) and, wouldn't you know it, was an instant fan. Quark is in my top 5 for Supporting Characters, and I am probably on of the few that did not appreciate the TNG characters coming aboard. I also did not like it when they made Sisko a Captain. But, to each their own. If I had the Latinum and equipment, I would make sure DS9 got its turn as a Blu-Ray release.
DS9 was a show that explored stories and characters deeply, and went in unexpected directions, and created worlds within worlds. It was truly great. I could have done without the Bajoran religion, but that was just one part of a huge tapestry.
Voyager had the "starship going out there" format I like better, and it had Seven of Nine and the Doctor that I like so much, but the writers often fell back on an irritating formula. Janeway would make principled but horrendously costly decisions. Immense disasters would befall the ship, only to be undone by a Reset Button at the end of Act IV. It got ridiculous for while. But there were also some great episodes (as good but not as frequent as DS9) and I loved the show in spite of myself.
Voyager had the "starship going out there" format I like better, and it had Seven of Nine and the Doctor that I like so much, but the writers often fell back on an irritating formula. Janeway would make principled but horrendously costly decisions. Immense disasters would befall the ship, only to be undone by a Reset Button at the end of Act IV. It got ridiculous for while. But there were also some great episodes (as good but not as frequent as DS9) and I loved the show in spite of myself.
The popularity of DS9 versus Voyager when it was on though has direct empirical evidence. DS9 got higher ratings.
I knew more people who watched Voyager when it was on too, but DS9 aired between the ages of 10 and 16 for me, and all the people I am thinking of were the same age. I think Voyager would appeal more than DS9 to that age group just because of the adventure format.
Also I remember there was a 'best scifi' bracket followed a year or so ago on this forum. TOS was the highest seed among Trek shows, TNG was next highest, DS9 was third highest, and Voyager and Enterprise were not even in the bracket.
@BillJ
Did you see me claim that DS9 was growing into being a populist sensation? No, it's just slowly picking up the curious people who decide to give it a chance, which is admittedly a small amount of people, and which is not happening at all with Voyager and Enterprise.
That is not financial success, but it's some measure of creative success.
Similar threads
