Why is DS9 the black sheep?
- Thread starter T'Baio
- Start date
'kay--I love being right!
I'm supposed to believe that Sisko, the man who'd lived through Wolf whatever it was and seen the Borg nearly destroy Star Fleet, would be making pissy faces about allowing a few killed to save many? Actually--the episode might have been okay without Sisko's little 3-year old tantrum, crossing his arms etc. at the end. Hit folks over the head with your point instead of just making it much?
I'm supposed to believe that Sisko, the man who'd lived through Wolf whatever it was and seen the Borg nearly destroy Star Fleet, would be making pissy faces about allowing a few killed to save many? Actually--the episode might have been okay without Sisko's little 3-year old tantrum, crossing his arms etc. at the end. Hit folks over the head with your point instead of just making it much?
I find DS9 as being unremarkable.
I dunno I found Voyager and especially Enterprise last 2 seasons to be much more interesting than DS9.
From my perspective DS9 was ok, but nothing revolutionary, and dare I say it, a bit boring.
If anything there were numerous errors done in the DW that were extremely unrealistic for the Trek universe in total.
Other shows had their goofs as well, but Ds9 on numerous occasions for me took things out of proportion that made it that much more unremarkable.
Sorry but that's just my opinion.
Oh and 'Angel' ... you can agree to disagree for example, but it's interesting to note that as many people you find who will agree with your point of view, you will also find an equal number to disagree with you.
I also wouldn't call DS9 being the 'black sheep'.
In my opinion, I think people want to stress out DS9 for what it did, and that those things were much more 'important' and 'bigger' than what other shows did.
In truth though, some people simply didn't look at DS9 from the same point of view or perceive the things it did any bigger or important than what other shows did.
Ds9's 'complexity' was rather easy to follow and understand actually ... but it wasn't that much interesting for some people.
I dunno I found Voyager and especially Enterprise last 2 seasons to be much more interesting than DS9.
From my perspective DS9 was ok, but nothing revolutionary, and dare I say it, a bit boring.
If anything there were numerous errors done in the DW that were extremely unrealistic for the Trek universe in total.
Other shows had their goofs as well, but Ds9 on numerous occasions for me took things out of proportion that made it that much more unremarkable.
Sorry but that's just my opinion.
Oh and 'Angel' ... you can agree to disagree for example, but it's interesting to note that as many people you find who will agree with your point of view, you will also find an equal number to disagree with you.
I also wouldn't call DS9 being the 'black sheep'.
In my opinion, I think people want to stress out DS9 for what it did, and that those things were much more 'important' and 'bigger' than what other shows did.
In truth though, some people simply didn't look at DS9 from the same point of view or perceive the things it did any bigger or important than what other shows did.
Ds9's 'complexity' was rather easy to follow and understand actually ... but it wasn't that much interesting for some people.
^^ I've got no problem with having a different point of view, and I'll respect anyone that's willing to back up their opinion with substance. 
The thing that I've always found interesting, is that amongst my non-Star Trek viewing friends/peers, DS9 is often the only incarnation they've bothered to watch.
I wouldn't say that DS9 was important or as influential as say B5, but in terms of Star Trek, it tried to take things in a different direction. At the very least it tried to show the way. The central theme/arc was not as sophisticated as that of B5, but it was never likely to be as morally ambiguous given that it still had to adhere to certain Star Trek conventions to some degree.
In the grand scheme of things, DS9 was a brave attempt. It didn't change much in the genre, mostly beaten to it by B5, but in terms of the franchise, at the very least, it wasn't just more of the same, which ultimately both Voyager and Enterprise were, simply looking to follow a similar template as laid down by TNG.
I hated DS9 when it first started. I hated TNG for not being TOS, I hated DS9 for not being TNG, and I even hated B5 for not being Star Trek. Grew to love them all in the end, but Voyager and Enterprise, for me, were just a complete waste of time and effort.
If Star Trek ever comes back as a TV series, they really should give it to JMS and just let him do what he wants with it. For me, that would have been a better choice than giving the movie franchise to JJA.
The thing that I've always found interesting, is that amongst my non-Star Trek viewing friends/peers, DS9 is often the only incarnation they've bothered to watch.
I wouldn't say that DS9 was important or as influential as say B5, but in terms of Star Trek, it tried to take things in a different direction. At the very least it tried to show the way. The central theme/arc was not as sophisticated as that of B5, but it was never likely to be as morally ambiguous given that it still had to adhere to certain Star Trek conventions to some degree.
In the grand scheme of things, DS9 was a brave attempt. It didn't change much in the genre, mostly beaten to it by B5, but in terms of the franchise, at the very least, it wasn't just more of the same, which ultimately both Voyager and Enterprise were, simply looking to follow a similar template as laid down by TNG.
I hated DS9 when it first started. I hated TNG for not being TOS, I hated DS9 for not being TNG, and I even hated B5 for not being Star Trek. Grew to love them all in the end, but Voyager and Enterprise, for me, were just a complete waste of time and effort.
If Star Trek ever comes back as a TV series, they really should give it to JMS and just let him do what he wants with it. For me, that would have been a better choice than giving the movie franchise to JJA.
I have my own reasons for not liking ds9.
First off, Bajor/Cardassia was always about Israel/Palestine or it seemed that way to me. And it didn't seem to deviate much from that one-note song -- the oppressed Bajorans with their silly religion wanting justice for the Cardassian occupation.
The Bajoran religion played too big a role in the story. The prophets named Sisko as Emissary, they were the subject of the I-can't-believe-its-not-creationism/evolution debate. They seemed to be involved in taking the crew to the 1950s or some such where they pretended to be famous scifi writers -- and Sisko couldn't be in the pictures. I got the impression that in-universe, the Prophets were exactly what the Bajorans said they were. It would have been nice if the religion weren't portrayed as absolute fact.
I like sisko most of the time, however it got kind of annoying when Sisko would self-righeously explain to everybody exactly why he was right and everybody else was wrong.
First off, Bajor/Cardassia was always about Israel/Palestine or it seemed that way to me. And it didn't seem to deviate much from that one-note song -- the oppressed Bajorans with their silly religion wanting justice for the Cardassian occupation.
The Bajoran religion played too big a role in the story. The prophets named Sisko as Emissary, they were the subject of the I-can't-believe-its-not-creationism/evolution debate. They seemed to be involved in taking the crew to the 1950s or some such where they pretended to be famous scifi writers -- and Sisko couldn't be in the pictures. I got the impression that in-universe, the Prophets were exactly what the Bajorans said they were. It would have been nice if the religion weren't portrayed as absolute fact.
I like sisko most of the time, however it got kind of annoying when Sisko would self-righeously explain to everybody exactly why he was right and everybody else was wrong.
'Photon'
For me it was a bit dull.
See there's this thing called variety, and what some people find interesting, other people may find extremely boring.
The Bajorans were ok, but hardly interesting.
Focusing too much on the past events (occupation) and religion instead of DOING things more actively to improve things for themselves.
The Changelings were half interesting in my opinion, and their stupid hatred over all 'solids' that lasts for millenniums ... now those really have a problem letting go of the past.
The Dominion War ...
Don't get me even started with that one.
The Feds were supposed to take on the Dominion 1 on 1 with a stale mate operation.
Sisko was an idiot for not collapsing the wormhole sooner if he wanted to avoid a war.
And you will tell me that it takes the combined forces of the Federation, Klingons AND Romulans to take on the Dominion/Cardassians ?
On numerous points it was stressed out the Feds would present the biggest problem for the Dominion.
And you will tell me the hostilities between the Feds and the Klingons would weaken the Feds more than enough to not being able to fight the Dominion ?
The fight was held over a single sector of space that was 'that' well protected by Klingons the Feds suffered losses ?
Too much unrealistic drama to tell you the truth.
It was in Federation space, and you will tell me the Klingons wouldn't be taking a brunt of it at the beginning of taking over Arkanis system, let alone while the conflict was underway ?
Please.
I'm sorry, but `drama` in case of DS9 dumbed the show down on so many levels in numerous cases for me it turned out to be that much less remarkable.
And the first two seasons of DS9 for me were equally boring to TNG's first 2 seasons (that even had some much more interesting episodes).
But that's just my opinion.
Tastes differ.
Just because I don't agree with you doesn't make me being 'incorrect'.
For me it was a bit dull.
See there's this thing called variety, and what some people find interesting, other people may find extremely boring.
The Bajorans were ok, but hardly interesting.
Focusing too much on the past events (occupation) and religion instead of DOING things more actively to improve things for themselves.
The Changelings were half interesting in my opinion, and their stupid hatred over all 'solids' that lasts for millenniums ... now those really have a problem letting go of the past.
The Dominion War ...
Don't get me even started with that one.
The Feds were supposed to take on the Dominion 1 on 1 with a stale mate operation.
Sisko was an idiot for not collapsing the wormhole sooner if he wanted to avoid a war.
And you will tell me that it takes the combined forces of the Federation, Klingons AND Romulans to take on the Dominion/Cardassians ?
On numerous points it was stressed out the Feds would present the biggest problem for the Dominion.
And you will tell me the hostilities between the Feds and the Klingons would weaken the Feds more than enough to not being able to fight the Dominion ?
The fight was held over a single sector of space that was 'that' well protected by Klingons the Feds suffered losses ?
Too much unrealistic drama to tell you the truth.
It was in Federation space, and you will tell me the Klingons wouldn't be taking a brunt of it at the beginning of taking over Arkanis system, let alone while the conflict was underway ?
Please.
I'm sorry, but `drama` in case of DS9 dumbed the show down on so many levels in numerous cases for me it turned out to be that much less remarkable.
And the first two seasons of DS9 for me were equally boring to TNG's first 2 seasons (that even had some much more interesting episodes).
But that's just my opinion.
Tastes differ.
Just because I don't agree with you doesn't make me being 'incorrect'.
Compare and contrast;
DS9 introduced the gamma quadrant, the Dominion, and an intergalactic war. To be fair, things were as highly-paced as they were on B5, largely because they stretched their story over just five years rather than padding it out to seven.
Voyager was gifted the delta quadrant, the Borg, an in-built conflict with the Maquis/Starfleet divide, and a sound premise for it's central narrative, ie. trying to get home. DS9 lived up to its promise, for me at least. Voyager, had everything going for it, but screwed it up.
They spent the first couple of episodes stressing the desire to get home as fast as possible, but by the third or fourth episode they were stopping off to investigate nearby gaseous clouds for coffee? WTF? After that it was pretty much a weekly dose of 'lets stop off and poke our nose into the affairs of this week's alien race'.
Let's not even get into how they completely screwed up the Borg. Once the most dangerous foe to ever appear in the Star Trek universe, ultimately emasculated and turned into little more than pantomime villains.
Enterprise, they could have really played out the 'first meeting with the Klingons', exploring the aftermath etc, instead, the 'disastrous first contact' turned out to be one of them being shot by Jonny Buckwheat from Iowa....They could have done the Romulan War. Instead, the Romulans are pretty much relegated to an afterthought. They could have a story in motion to build up to the birth of the Federation. Instead, it's a tacked on ending to the series.
I can understand why some people found DS9 to be tedious, arc-intensive shows can often come across as being too 'soap-operaish', and taking an age to get anywhere, but for me, the more effort you put in as a viewer, the greater the reward of the payoff.
A very concise summation of something a number of people have been pointing out for years and which is often ignored in favour of simplistic praise / bashing. Thanks, Temis. It's very cool to see you post something like this.
This pretty much sums up my views on the show, too (even though it's not the point of the thread, so apologies to the OP for continuing on this course). DS9 didn't really do anything different in TV terms. Different for Trek? Certainly. But in terms of TV shows in general it wasn't as innovative as some (note the emphasis) of its fans claim it to be. It therefore (along with the fact I didn't find most of the characters very interesting) didn't keep my attention because I'd seen it all before - just not in a Trek setting.
For all that I fully intend to watch the show again some day, from go to whoa. And in "Duet" it produced an episode that's among my personal four Best Trek Eps Ever. I'm not a fan of the show but I'm not going to trash it, either. It just didn't appeal to me.
Got no problem with that. After TNG, I'd had my fill of 'planet of the week'/'aliens of the week' episodes. For me, part of the appeal of making the show static, restricting them to the station, was that they could no longer rely on tired plot devices and deus ex machina aliens/planets of the week.
I actually agree on this one. One of the weaker parts of the series for me, the Bajorans. It took them seven years to tell a 2 year story there. For me, the Bajorans only served one purpose, to facilitate Sisko's destiny in terms of the prophets. The 'occupation' stuff with the Cardassians become old after about two episodes, although the Kira/Dukat interplay was good to watch, largely due to Marc Alaimo's performances.
To be fair, time for them is pretty irrelevant, hence whether they hold a grudge for 5 minutes, or 5 millennia, it's pretty much one and the same to them, given their lengthy lifespans.
Sisko couldn't close the wormhole. It wasn't Starfleet's call. Prior to its discovery Bajor was a backwater, after, it's pretty much the most important place in the Alpha Quadrant, both strategically, commercially, culturally, etc. Given its importance, it both put Bajor on the map, and made any potential future Cardassian re-occupation almost impossible. They certainly weren't going to close it down until they knew they were completely outmatched by the Dominion, which didn't become apparent until the fifth season when they did eventually come through. At that point the wormhole was mined and made effectively useless to the Dominion as a portal for reinforcements.
It's no real surprise that it took the combined might of the Federation/Klingon/Romulan fleets to go up against the Dominion. The Cardassians alone had been able to sustain a stalemated war with the Federation as stated in TNG. Given that the Dominion were far larger and far more powerful then either of them, no real surprise that the Alpha Quadrant ultimately had to unite to beat them.
I don't really think that DS9 dumbed down too much at all. Take In the Pale Moonlight for example. You know full well if that had happened on any other incarnation of Star Trek then the Romulans would have been bought onside simply because they managed to convince the Romulan senator that it was the right thing to do. Given what we know of the Romulans that would have completely flown in the face of everything that had come to know of them. DS9 took the realistic route of 'any means necessary'. Personally, I found that kind of approach refreshing for Star Trek. People aren't either black or white, TOS had already made a mockery of that concept 30 years before with Let That be Your Last Battlefield. Again, for me, it can easily be argued that DS9 was when Star Trek started to treat its viewers as adults, choosing not to deal in moral absolutes. To me, that makes for far better drama.
I respect your opinion, this is just mine, whether it be right, wrong, or indifferent!
Sure--in TREK, but in the real world, it happens all the time. Thus, In the Pale Moonlight is just another humdrum morality play instead of something interesting about what the future might be like. In the Pale Moonlight is about the present. That's not why I'm watching Star Trek.
I'd suggest you look up 'Star Trek' and 'allegory'. Star Trek's always been at its best when its allegorising contemporary issues/motives.
Some people watch Star Trek for the special effects and the space battles, but that's not what made Star Trek great in the first place.
I don't watch it for special effects and space battles (wormhole and Dominion War = DS9 anyone?)--I watch for characters. Enterprise had the best characters, followed by TOS. I enjoyed 7 on Voyager, TOS hasn't aged well, and the DS9 characters didn't interest me much.
O.K., I'm starting to repeat myself, so I'm moving on and letting other folks have their say.
O.K., I'm starting to repeat myself, so I'm moving on and letting other folks have their say.
My opinion on why DS9 is the black sheep in Paramount's eyes: It is the one show that Berman and the traditional powers that be had the least direct involvement with. Precisely because of that, it became by far the best Trek show. I suspect that the powers that be resent the fact that by far the best Trek show, is the one that they had the least to do with. Hence they give it the black sheep treatment for that reason.
My opinion on why DS9 is the black sheep in the general public's eyes: Unfortunately, for me to answer this question honestly, it would be against this site's rules, therefore I cannot.
My opinion on why DS9 is the black sheep in the general public's eyes: Unfortunately, for me to answer this question honestly, it would be against this site's rules, therefore I cannot.
It's too realistic when dealing with human nature. It also deals with the fact that not only does taking the high road not always work, when dealing predators it it be a weakness. Apparently star Trek is supposed to be the good guys always make the right decisions, everything can be resolved through talking, and the technology always saves the day at the last moment.
Odd given that the extent of character development in DS9 is pretty much unrivalled anywhere else in Star Trek.
Enterprise's characters were little more than laughable charicatures. I have to be honest, there's practically no measurement by which Enterprise's characters can be described as being better then those from TOS, TNG or DS9. The less said about Voyager's characters the better. Perhaps we should go and ask Rob Beltran for his thoughts on how Chakotay developed over the course of seven years?
I think you'll find that as far as character dynamics go, TOS has aged remarkably well. Try as they might, the triumvirate relationship between the three primaries has still to be bettered.
DS9, simple fact, the peripheral characters, Dukat, Rom, Nog, Damar, Garak, Martok, Leeta, Weyoun, etc, etc, etc, all pretty much better developed than the principle casts from Voyager and Enterprise. In truth, the character from Enterprise with the most development was probably Porthos.
Enterprise's characters were little more than laughable charicatures. I have to be honest, there's practically no measurement by which Enterprise's characters can be described as being better then those from TOS, TNG or DS9. The less said about Voyager's characters the better. Perhaps we should go and ask Rob Beltran for his thoughts on how Chakotay developed over the course of seven years?
I think you'll find that as far as character dynamics go, TOS has aged remarkably well. Try as they might, the triumvirate relationship between the three primaries has still to be bettered.
DS9, simple fact, the peripheral characters, Dukat, Rom, Nog, Damar, Garak, Martok, Leeta, Weyoun, etc, etc, etc, all pretty much better developed than the principle casts from Voyager and Enterprise. In truth, the character from Enterprise with the most development was probably Porthos.
