TOS-TNG-DS9 and Why They Fit Together Nicely

[SchwEnt]

I agree there's something special in The Big Three of
TOS-TNG-DS9.

I'll claim it has to do with a theory I've devised and heard originated with others...

TOS naturally was the original. Boldy going where no man has gone before.

TNG took that premise and could finally do justice to the grand idea...bigger budget, better effects to convey the story, more time to tell those stories--all the things they wish they had during TOS.

DS9 took this well-established ST universe and pushed the envelope, as they say. And how. Took the ST universe in directions it had never gone, in many ways...with character, with story, with styles.

So there's your Big Three.

Everything else that has come since, the UPN Trek, has just been network product. Going to the well too many times.
Re-hashing old material. Nothing new.

VOY had potential but ditched its own premises from Day One.
Became TNG Jr.

ENT, too, suffered the same lot. Tried to be groundbreaking, but more often than not just re-tread.

Not that they weren't good...but they didn't expand ST in new ways.

So yeah, I agree...they don't fit in as well as TOS-TNG-DS9 do together.

 

[Warped9]

patlandness said:
Recently I got Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine complete series sets on DVD to go with my Star Trek: The Original Series (or just "Star Trek" as some of you TOS-only Luddites insist on ) DVDs, and have been just thrilled with how well these 3 shows just "click" together for the most part in their own way. It's sort of a trilogy in my eyes.

I mean if you watch DS9's "Emissary" and "Trials and Tribble-ations" back-to-back you'll see what I mean, the 3 Trekkian universes just blend in so well together with a little imagination and dramatic flair on the part of the DS9 writers.

I think why these 3 shows do that is that while they are distinctly different from each other they were made with loving care by dedicated people who really "got it". Sure neither TOS, TNG, or DS9 were perfect (despite some hardliners may say), but even in their lesser episodes, there was a sense of spontenaity and experimentation rather than tiredly going-through-the-motions like UPN Trek.

What say you all? I'm sure I'll hear from the TOS-only crowd along with TOS-DS9 chic movement--disregarding TNG's contribution to the franchise. (Come on TNG fans speak out for your favorite show! I know you're out there! ) And there are those that are a fan of all 5 shows (and that's cool, I suppose). But I want to know:

Are there any fans of this "Trekkian Trilogy" or am I whistling in the dark?

Good thing you're not afraid of the dark. The three series have very little in common.

 

[Anwar]

Of course YOU would say that...

 

[ktanner3]

Good thing you're not afraid of the dark. The three series have very little in common.

Which is what makes them great. They didn't try and repeat what came before it. The first three fit together nicley because they allowed you to see the trek universe from a different point of view.I can see perfectly where the OP is coming from. I love the first three series. I hated Voyager because it just seemed like TNG in the delta quadrant and the first three seasons of enterprise was a bastardazion of TOS.

 

[Arpy]

Though I didn't like half of DS9 (Red-eyed Dukat, etc) and did like parts of VOY ("Death Wish", etc), these three, "The Big Three," are the only ones that count in my book, in my own personal Star Trek Universe.

...Such great shows...

 

[jimbo1973]

I agree with the original post..they are three chapters of a story..

 

[Trekkin' Trev']

I agreed with this before finally getting through all of ENT and VOY and now that I have I still agree.

Both TNG and DS9 pick up on several TOS threads (Spock, Scotty, mirror universe, Klingon captains, tribbles etc.); they're not afraid to acknowledge the continuity and build on it. They fit nicely with the feature films as well.

The only thing I wish (and what really would have cemented this further) is if there was more internal continuity during the time that TNG and DS9 were running concurrently. There is some vague connection (Admiral Nacheyev, the Maquis/Cardassian tensions etc.) but it would have been great if different aspects of the same plot lines were mentioned on both shows.

Also, the Enterprise-E should have been involved in the Dominion war. For some of the big battle episodes toward the end it should have at least been mentioned and really the entire cast of TNG should have been part of the final battle. Maybe it was some snobbish "we're doing features" now thing, but INS was unworthy. They should have foregone making it and done a Dominion war finale feature a year later with both casts.

Getting off the point, but in general I agree. I would enjoy TOS, TNG, & DS9 over and over, but once was enough for VOY and ENT.

 

[Vonstadt]

The Big 3 ! I like that. As an old timer I dont mind the term TOS

All three were ground breaking for their time and all three were wonderfully free of the mess that was UPNTrek. (not counting S4 of ENT)

They make a great trio of fine SCIFI and though TNG is just a bit behind the other two for me. These three shows are the best of the 5

 

[Chess Piece Face]

I group it like this:

TOS
DS9

both amazing shows that did new things that nothing else had ever done.

TNG a great show by its own right, that also successfully brought back Trek after years.

ENT Season 4, certain episodes plus Twilight, which I don't think was in that season.

All these are my group of "Good Trek".

Voyager, well, that's a fun show if you loosen you care about Trek while you watch it and just think of it on the level of some Xena type syndicated sci fi show.

Enterprise - forget it.

 

[Garth Rockett]

Starkers said:

Well for me TOS and DS9 are out in front, but TNG isn't too far behind, and is certainly well ahead of Voy and Ent.

TNG has probably dated more than any other Trek show, and by god there were some woeful episodes, but when they got it right they made some of the best Trek episodes ever, so I'll always love it

Your feelings mirror my own exactly. For me, it's definitely TOS and DS9 at the top, but TNG is a classic that should not be underestimated. Those three were all worthy of the name Star Trek.

I liked Voyager and Enterprise as well, but they never reached the consistently high levels of quality of the others, with the exception of Enterprise's fourth season, IMO.

 

[aladinsane]

I, too, love the first 3 treks. Upon recent rewatching, I find Enterprise far more enjoyable than I did during its first run, but it still pales in comparison to the "big three." When asked to choose a favorite among them I usually can't. There are elements of each that are so different and yet so strong that make each show special. TOS has this special aura of brilliance during a time when scifi was silly. TNG had some terrific writing and acting, and a cast chemistry that made the characters feel like friends. Plus, some of the best episodes of television ever made. DS9 tooks some risks with its storytelling that make for edge-of-the-seat viewing. The Star Trek brand can be proud of these 3 shows for years, no matter what is to come--the bar was set pretty high with TOS, TNG, and DS9.

 

[MarkKalz]

The 'big 3' as we call them remain classic because I think they have that quality that few modern TV shows have...they give you respect for your intelligence, and challenge you intellectually with ideas. TNG was the baby I grew up with, and I loved being able to spend two hours each day in grade school (Thank you syndication for two hours every night!) with intelligent people all tackling big problems with big ideas, while trying hard not to resort to violence. Today's American TV only lazily defines the intelligent heros in the David Curuso CSI style, who seems to have the answer to every problem just because he's the best, and is almost in-human in how he conducts his investigations.

TNG instead feels like seven strong personalities, all coming at problems from completely different angles, trying to reason it out. They are not always right, and Picard is the great kind of strong personality who can own up to his weaknesses and mistakes.

TOS was the root of this kind of intelligent TV. Spock gave us a fresh perspective on humanity and the nature of emotions. Strong script writing continually challenged the viewer and gave us stuff to think about long after the credits rolled. DS9 gave us much less of the adventerous spirit, but maintained the intelligence, giving us new ideas and new emotional dilemmas. Through all three, I always got that great sense that this was great drama you couldn't see on conventional TV. (Find any other show that could get away with TNG's 'Tapestry', 'Inner Light', or DS9's 'The Visitor')

Voyager just got too hung up on Borg attacks, and pathetic attempts to 'sex up' the show, pandering to a demograph Star Trek hardly has a stake in, while alienating its hardcore demograph. Enterprise had this problem even moreso. Both shows at times still gave us ideas at times, but never on the same level as its predecessors.

I am hard pressed to find shows that have that same intelligence outside of the 'big 3'. Lost I think does it quite well, as did the Buffysaga, but I find myself quite dissapointed in 'Heroes'.

 

[jimbtnp2]

Warped9 said:

patlandness said:
Recently I got Star Trek: The Next Generation and Star Trek: Deep Space Nine complete series sets on DVD to go with my Star Trek: The Original Series (or just "Star Trek" as some of you TOS-only Luddites insist on ) DVDs, and have been just thrilled with how well these 3 shows just "click" together for the most part in their own way. It's sort of a trilogy in my eyes.

I mean if you watch DS9's "Emissary" and "Trials and Tribble-ations" back-to-back you'll see what I mean, the 3 Trekkian universes just blend in so well together with a little imagination and dramatic flair on the part of the DS9 writers.

I think why these 3 shows do that is that while they are distinctly different from each other they were made with loving care by dedicated people who really "got it". Sure neither TOS, TNG, or DS9 were perfect (despite some hardliners may say), but even in their lesser episodes, there was a sense of spontenaity and experimentation rather than tiredly going-through-the-motions like UPN Trek.

What say you all? I'm sure I'll hear from the TOS-only crowd along with TOS-DS9 chic movement--disregarding TNG's contribution to the franchise. (Come on TNG fans speak out for your favorite show! I know you're out there! ) And there are those that are a fan of all 5 shows (and that's cool, I suppose). But I want to know:

Are there any fans of this "Trekkian Trilogy" or am I whistling in the dark?

Good thing you're not afraid of the dark. The three series have very little in common.

agreed - they tried with s1 of tng but B&B destroyed that

 

[Anwar]

Cut the bullplop. Braga wasn't even around back then and Berman didn't start taking an active hand in the series until VOY.

Michael Piller was the Exec in charge of most of TNG, not Berman.

Do research and check your facts dummy.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

Be nice

 

[Brutal Strudel]

Kegek`s Corpse said:
I'm in complete agreement. I've always been a TOS-TNG-DS9 fan, I consider them all great shows for different reasons. Their diversity compliments each other quite well.

I'm a TOS luddite who happens to like DS9. I like DS9 partially because, of all the spin-offs, it was the show that seemed to really love and revere TOS. The other three all seemed to think they were superior to it. Not that's a larff!

 

[Kegek]

Berman was a producer on TNG for all seven seasons - and exec from around late season one / season two, IIRC - and was actually the guy who brought Michael Piller onboard.

Berman later co-created DS9 with Piller, co-created VOY with Piller and Taylor, and co-created ENT with Braga. He served as executive producer on all three shows. Like him, love him, loathe him, feel indifferent to him, no man was involved in more Star Trek than Rick Berman was.

 

[jimbtnp2]

Anwar said:
Cut the bullplop. Braga wasn't even around back then and Berman didn't start taking an active hand in the series until VOY.

Michael Piller was the Exec in charge of most of TNG, not Berman.

Do research and check your facts dummy.

areyou saying Berman wasn't running the show s4-s7 with influence in S3? When Imean running the show, i mean he was the top dog, and we all know Braga was berman's right hand man

get your facts straight buddy

 

[Anwar]

Braga didn't become his right-hand-man until VOY S4, before that he was just a writer and he wasn't even around in TNG S1-2.

And Berman may have been the Exec, but Piller had a more direct hand in the writing of TNG and DS9's first two seasons because he was an actual screenwriter. Hell, Berman didn't take a really direct role in the writing of the series until VOY, before that he did leave more to Piller, Tayor and the others.

And you're the guy who thinks that none of the shows post-TOS did "sci-fi storytelling" so I doubt you'd know what real sci-fi storytelling was anyways.

 

[Kegek]

Braga came onboard TNG around S4 or so, I'm not sure about the specifics. He was involved in writing numerous episodes, including "Cause and Effect" (the Enterprise blows up) "Frame of Mind" (Riker seems to be losing his mind, a personal favourite) and co-wrote the finale, "All Good Things." He was a producer, but not an executive, IIRC. Braga was of course also involved throughout the run of VOY, and co-created ENT. The one Berman-era show he had no involvement with was DS9, the TNG crossover episode "Birthright, Part I" being his closest shot.