Have to agree, going through a rewatch of TNG just now and after the third season the series really lost something. Perhaps it was Piller’s insistence that stories be primarily character driven. The problem with that is...aside for Picard, Data and maybe Worf, most of TNG’s characters simply aren’t that interesting or dynamic. I wish the sci-fi elements had been better developed in later seasons instead of tepid soap opera stuff. I loved the early season’s sense of energy, danger and freshness. I almost gave up my rewatch in season 5 but the completist in me has trundled on. I’d watch s1-3 again in a heartbeat though!
that’s a controversial opinion. Here are a couple more:
This may trigger a few aneurysms but I think Michael Burnham is a better series lead than either Archer or Janeway. I find her flawed and interesting, and she’s had legitimately more character development in 20 episodes or so than most Trek characters get in an entire series.
Conversely I hate Janeway. Her writing was woefully inconsistent, and throughout the series she was always portrayed as being infallibly right when in fact she made some bloody awful decisions. Having a romance with a Holodeck character was perhaps the nadir and demonstrated that the writers didn’t really have a clue what they were doing. I think Kate Mulgrew can act, but her performance struck me as stylised and her mannerisms and quirks really grated on me for some reason. I guess she watched too many Katherine Hepburn movies growing up!
also... I think TNG movies should have stopped at First Contact.
and, I love TOS (along with DS9 I think it’s the pinnacle of a Trek), but find the animated series almost impossible to watch.