I can't entirely speak for my feelings at the time, but given what had befallen Sisko, I couldn't exactly blame him for feeling the way he did even if it wasn't entirely rational. And I might have thought it was kind of fun having someone not treat Picard like a saint. Somewhat in the spirit of the Admiral Nechayev take-downs, though a bit less so.
What about Emissary turned people off?
- Thread starter GulBahana
- Start date
I watched the first episode of Stargate SG-1 in 1997 and never saw another episode. Just because you didn't like a pilot doesn't mean anything.
To be fair the first season of TNG was very wooden and forced as well. It takes a bit of time for most new shows to "gel" and for the actors to find the characters. I'd put the DSN pilot up against any of the other Trek pilots any day of the week.
I think DS9's first season is probably it's worst and as a whole that's what contributed to people jumping off.
I had erroneous memories of Sisko kicking Picard about in the pilot. hahaha. But having rewatched it, he's not too bad. Just a bit abrupt and that seems to be blended in with his consternation at his assignment.
I can't remember how that pilot was advertised exactly but there was an anticipation there as the first sequel to TNG. I presume they plugged Locutus doing his thing in the promotion, promising a series with action-action-action but what happened? The pace turned out to be quite different, much slower, more nichey, it struggled to find its feet so no wonder the audience dropped off.
I can't remember how that pilot was advertised exactly but there was an anticipation there as the first sequel to TNG. I presume they plugged Locutus doing his thing in the promotion, promising a series with action-action-action but what happened? The pace turned out to be quite different, much slower, more nichey, it struggled to find its feet so no wonder the audience dropped off.
Nothing turned me off personally about "Emissary". It was terrific in 1993, and it still is now. Early DS9 produced some of the best of Trek (shame about the end of it 
)
)
I think this "anticippointment" theory is probably on target.
DS9 was a tough pill to swallow coming in the midst of TNG. TNG had a strong, mostly grounded captain. He let his guard down for the audience occasionally and with a few choice characters at times, but for the most part he was commanding, strong and steadfast. He loved Starfleet and everything it stood for. Sisko was crying in the first 5 minutes of the pilot episode. This was a man who was emotionally messed up, raising a son on his own, and had mostly misguided resentment for Starfleet. Sisko is seen as a man who is deeply flawed and has no desire to command or captain. He wants to go home with his son. Picard was loyal to Starfleet. Sisko's loyalty was to his son.
The Enterprise-D was huge, clean, exciting and attractive. All of the cool people wanted to be there. DS9 was rickety, falling apart, dirty and alien in the armpit of space. Only the scum of the earth wanted to be there at first.
Enterprise-D could move super fast and rescue the universe in the blink of an eye. DS9 struggled to move a few feet without falling apart. Some fans came on board with the Defiant, but most probably thought it was too little too late, or obviously trying to be TNG-light at that point (which it definitely wasn't, but perception is what it is).
Then there's the Bajoran religion, which was given lots of time in the pilot. I think religiophobia had a lot to do with the dislike of the series...though I personally think they could have done even more with it.
The aliens were relatively unfamiliar. Cardassians? Bajorans? Who cares about them! Where are the Klingons? Vulcans? Romulans?
It felt dark and heavy. Not very uplifting. Total opposite of TNG. Though there were some glimmers of hope at the end of the pilot.
I think the biggest thing for me, at the time, was the whole concept of a "star trek" series being stationary. As a teen, I just found the whole concept incredibly boring. That, plus the wooden performances at the beginning really turned me off. Later when I tried to tune in from time to time, there were so many serial elements that I had no idea what was going on.
I'm really glad I gave it a second chance a few years ago. Boy was I wrong about this series. It's truly the best.
TNG had a very bland pilot, for me. The acting was equally wooden and/or extremely overacted. I found some of Crosby's performance in the pilot totally cringeworthy.
Voyager was the opposite to me. It had the most promising pilot (for me), but unraveled into a very technobabble-heavy series that should have been (to me) more like what nuBSG ended up being, but wasn't even close.
I thought Enterprise had an interesting pilot, but a mostly forgettable first two seasons. Season 3 and 4 were like different shows altogether. They were fantastic. I especially enjoyed season 3.
I liked the pilot a lot, good way of introducing the setting and characters, especially where Sisko had been and would be going; I think the cast and characters were pretty good from the beginning (as was the case with TNG from its beginning). However I think a lot of general viewers would dislike that there were so many aliens, including as first officer; I think if you don't start out watching Trek fairly young the makeup of the Bajorans, Ferengi and changelings could seem a little too goofy.
I think the first two seasons overall are quite good but especially the first doesn't deal much with the Bajoran and Cardassian issues (and certainly not on the Prophets or Sisko's role as emissary) so that could contribute to the idea that the station setting meant inconsequential and less exciting stories.
I think the first two seasons overall are quite good but especially the first doesn't deal much with the Bajoran and Cardassian issues (and certainly not on the Prophets or Sisko's role as emissary) so that could contribute to the idea that the station setting meant inconsequential and less exciting stories.
Last edited:
There are a lot of reasons TNG fan didn't take to DS9 immediately. Not liking the cast as much at the beginning, some weak episodes at the beginning. I think the biggest thing that left a sour taste though was the prominent role of Ferengi. Quark was a great character when he was cast as the observer in Federation affairs but episodes that focused on the Ferengi were downright cartoonish. A lot of people just didn't care about plots involving Ferengi pursing business deals and found their antics and exaggerated funny accents annoying.
Ferengi accents?
The actors presumably had to work hard to pronounce words coherently, and often their lips didn't meet each other when they should have for certain consonants. This is thanks to the excessive amount of extra teeth crammed in their mouths. I suppose the result could be interpreted as an accent?
Never seen it that way. If anything, Sisko is right and Picard IS an effete prick in that scene.
I liked Picard's involvement in the pilot and I think it works well, for this pilot. Although the title card at the beginning of the programme kind of awkward. But I feel that's more to do with how it's presented, it looks like an afterthought, rather than a proper introduction to the tale. Other than that, there's a lot to like about this particular episode and I'm very fond of it. The promise of a different format from TNG, but still being very comfortable in that "universe," it all seems very compelling. Unfortunately, the first season can give the impression of seeming a bit flat. But the pilot has a lot of rewatch value to it and I've always been a fan of "Emissary."
I don't know what turned people off in general, but I know what turned me off of Emissary. The main thing is that it is mind-numbingly boring, especially due to the the wormhole aliens and Bajoran politics, both of which are two of DS9's least entertaining, least interesting, and oftentimes incredibly annoying features, yet both of which are made to be the main features of Emissary.
To add insult to injury, much of the acting in Emissary is very bad (Farrell, Visitor, Siddig, Lofton, etc.), and much of the make-up is ugly (Odo, the Ferengi, etc).
The only good thing I can think of about Emissary is that the Dukat actor nailed his role perfectly. No one else did.
To add insult to injury, much of the acting in Emissary is very bad (Farrell, Visitor, Siddig, Lofton, etc.), and much of the make-up is ugly (Odo, the Ferengi, etc).
The only good thing I can think of about Emissary is that the Dukat actor nailed his role perfectly. No one else did.
I actually like the episode and enjoy a lot of the season 1 and 2 DS9 episodes, so maybe I'm not the best one to give a guess but...
I remember my dad complaining that it set off a story arc that then wasn't paid attention to for the rest of the season very much. They set up that Sisko isn't just a starfleet officer but an Emissary to their prophets, but then for the next couple seasons it doesn't come into play. He felt like if they were going to go there, they should GO there (which they did later). But then, he made the same complaint about the Marquis on Voyager acting like regular Starfleet, so maybe that was just a pet peeve of his lol
I remember my dad complaining that it set off a story arc that then wasn't paid attention to for the rest of the season very much. They set up that Sisko isn't just a starfleet officer but an Emissary to their prophets, but then for the next couple seasons it doesn't come into play. He felt like if they were going to go there, they should GO there (which they did later). But then, he made the same complaint about the Marquis on Voyager acting like regular Starfleet, so maybe that was just a pet peeve of his lol
The problem with the first season was the expense of Emissary left the rest of the season in a budget constraint. And the unused story concepts from TNG.
Yeah, same. Though Trek was arguably more reflective then than now, all the flashing back and forth is confusing even for a regular season episode, and this was the pilot. It's best to throw your readers into the middle of things and fill the gaps out later. That way the impatient audience gets what it wants -- immediate satisfaction -- and the patient audience gets what it wants, the eventual gap-filling they're patient enough to wait for, anyway.
Similar threads
